The copyright © of this thesis belongs to its rightful author and/or other copyright

owner. Copies can be accessed and downloaded for non-commercial or learning

purposes without any charge and permission. The thesis cannot be reproduced or

quoted as a whole without the permission from its rightful owner. No alteration or

changes in format is allowed without permission from its rightful owner.

J

! E-VOTING SYSTEM ADOPTION AND ITS IMPACT ON

I VOTER TURNOUT IN NIGERIA

SABO AHMAD

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA

2016

E-VOTING SYSTEM ADOPTION AND ITS IMPACT ON VOTER TURNOUT IN NIGERLA

SABO AHMAD (94516)

A Thesis submitted to the Ghazali Shafie Graduate School of Government, Universiti Utatra Malaysia in fulfilment of the

requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy Universiti Utara Malaysia

PERMISSION TO USE

In presenting this thesis in fulfilment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree fi-om Universiti Utara Malaysia, I agree that the University Library may make it fi-eely available for inspection. I hrther agree that permission for copying of this thesis in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purpose may be granted by my supervisor(s) or, in their absence, by the Dean of Ghazali Shafie Graduate School of Government. It is understood that any copy, publication, or use of this thesis or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the Universiti Utara Malaysia for any scholarly use, which may be made of any material fkom my thesis.

Request for permission to copy or to make other use of materials in this thesis, in whole or in part, should be addressed to:

Dean (Ghazali Shafie Graduate School of Government)

UUM College of Law, Government and International Studies

Universiti Utara Malaysia

060 10 UUM Sintok

Kedah Darul Aman

ABSTRAK

Sistem pengundian sedia ada menggunakan kertas undi di Nigeria sedang berhadapan dengan pelbagai cabaran. Antaranya termasuklah pengundian berganda, pengundian oleh pengundi di bawah umur, ugutan terhadap pengundi, kesilapan atau pemalsuan keputusan pilihanraya. Kesan daripada sistem pengundian yang bermasalah boleh membawa kepada sikap ketidakpedulian politik dan menjejaskan bilangan pengundi keluar mengundi. Oleh itu, kerajaan merancang untuk memperkenalkan sistem e-pengundian untuk tujuan memperkukuhkan sistem pilihanraya supaya bebas, adil dan boleh dipercayai serta meningkatkan bilangan pengundi keluar mengundi. Walau bagaimanapun, sistem e- pengundian boleh menjadi penyelesaian kepada masalah bilangan keluar mengundi yang rendah jika ia dapat mempengaruhi para pengundi untuk mengambil bahagian dalam pilihanraya. Oleh itu, kajian ini bertujuan untuk meneliti faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi penggunaan teknologi e-pengundian dan kesannya terhadap peratusan keluar mengundi. Kajian ini membangunkan satu model penyertaan dalarn pilihanraya melalui sistem e- pilihanraya dengan menggabungkan teori-teori Pilihan Rasional, Difusi Teknologi, Model Trust dan konstruk Self-efficacy. Dengan menggunakan kaedah gabungan temuduga separa berstruktur dan survei, data dikumpulkan daripada pengundi, pegawai-pegawai pilihanraya dan parti politik di tiga buah negeri di bahagian timur laut Nigeria. Dengan menggunakan pendekatan PLS-SEM, model kajian menunjukkan pengaruh pembolehubah sifat-sifat teknologi, pembolehubah keyakinan dan kecekapan-kendiri komputer sebagai penentu-penentu penting terhadap niat untuk menyertai pilihanraya yang menggunakan teknologi e-pengundian Tambahan pula, kajian ini mendapati pembolehubah penggunaan dapat mempengaruhi keputusan rasional pengundi untuk mengambil bahagian dalam pilihanraya yang menggunakan teknologi e-pengundian. Antara potensi cabaran bagi penggunaan e-pengundian yang dlkenal pasti melalui analisis tematlk termasuk cabaran- cabaran institusi, sosio-psikologi, teknologi dan infrastruktur, manakala pengukuhan kerangka institusi, penguasaan teknologi, penyebaran maklumat yang berkesan dan penyediaan kemudahan yang mencukupi telah dikenal pasti sebagai antara langkah- langkah untuk menangani cabaran pelaksanaan e-pengundian. Kajian ini menyumbang kepada teori dan amalan sistem maklumat serta penyertaan dalam demokrasi dan dasar awam. Ia juga menyediakan pembuat dan pelaksana dasar dengan pemahaman mengenai penggunaan e-pengundian untuk melaksanakan perancangan strategik dan membuat keputusan mengenai sistem pengundian yang dikehendaki untuk meningkatkan penyertaan politik.

Kata kunci: e-Pengundian, Teori Pilihan Rasional, Difusi Teknologi, Nigeria.

ABSTRCT

There are numerous problems ascribed to the existing ballot paper voting system in Nigeria. Some of the identified problems include multiple voting, under aged voting, intimidation of voters and rniscomputation or falsification of election results. The consequences of the flawed voting system ofien lead to political apathy as well as decreased voter turnout. Consequently, the government plans to introduce e-voting system in order to enhance fiee, fair and credible elections as well as improve voter turnout. However, the e-voting system could be a solution to the problem of low turnout if it influences the electorates to participate in elections. Thus, this study is aimed at investigating factors that influence e-voting system adoption and its impact on voter turnout. By blending theories of Rational Choice, Diffusion of Innovation, Trust Model and Self-efficacy construct, the study conceptualized a model of election participation using e-voting system. Using combined methods of survey instrument and semi-structured interviews, data were collected fiom voters, government officials and political party officials across three States of the Northeastern Nigeria. Using PLS-SEM approach, the model demonstrated significant influence of technological attributes, trust and computer self-efficacy variables as determinants of intention to adopt e-voting system. In addition, the study demonstrated the significance of the adoption variables in influencing voter rational decision to participate in election using e-voting system. Potential challenges of e- voting adoption identified through thematic analysis include institutional, socio- psychological, technological and infiastructural challenges, while strengthening institutional framework, technological proficiency, effective information dissemination and provision of adequate requisite facilities were identified among other remedies to the challenges of e-voting adoption. The study has significant contributions to theory and practice of information system, participatory public policy and democracy. It also provides policy makers and practitioners with the understanding of e-voting adoption for strategic planning and decisions towards the desired voting system.

Keywords: e-Voting Adoption, Intention to Participate in Election, Voter Turnout, Rational Choice Theory, Nigeria.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I begin by expressing my profound gratitude to Almighty Allah, Most Compassionate and Most Merciful who in His infinite mercy and guidance make this academic success a reality. I am highly indebted to my supervisors, Associate Professor (Dr.) Siti Alida John Abdullah and Dr. Rozita Bt Arshad for their unquantifiable contributions at every step of this research work to its successful completion. Their erudite scholarship leaves in indelible mark in the evolution of my educational endeavor. I am also indebted to the Chairperson and members of my Viva Voce Panel namely Professor (Dr.) Kamarudin Ngah (Chairperson); Associate Professor (Dr.) Mohd Rizal Mohd Yaakop (External Examiner); Dr. Mohd Fitri Abdul Rahrnan (Internal Examiner) for their valuable contributions. It is equally pertinent to appreciate and acknowledge a number of people who in one way or the other contributed to the success of this research work. Appreciation to Associate Professor (Dr.) Samihah Khalil and Associate Professor (Dr.) Ahmad Martadha Mohammed for their immence contributions, especially at the early stage of this work. Special thanks to Madm Asyikin, Mr A Butt, Madm Noor Fatimah Hashlm, Mahdi Mansor, Mohd Noor, Nur Atika Zakaria, Siti Nazirah Zainuddin; and all academic and management staffs ofcollege of Law, Government and International Studies (COLGIS) for their support and assistance. Special thanks to staffs of INEC Bauchi, Gombe and Taraba States for their tremendous assistance while collecting the data used in this research.

Special appreciation to my dear father, Alhaj Sabo Jama'are and caring mother, Zainab Bt Hassan for their parenting. I am also gratefbl to my beloved wives Hassana Bt Usman and Rukka'atu Adam Jibrin; our blessed children, Aishah, Muhammad, Abdurrahman, Zainab and Abdullah for being sources of inspirations. Special thanks to my siblings Hauwa, Aliyu, Umar and Jibrin including the entire members of our family for their moral and financial support. I also thank my friends and colleagues in Nigeria and Malaysia particularly Dr. Aliyu Ahmad Aliyu, Hamisu Ibrahirn Alhaji, Dr. Murtala Aminu Ibrahim, Sadiq Launi, Inuwa Abdu Ibrahirn, Siraj Ado Jahun and many others too numerous to mention.

DECLARATION

I declare that this thesis is my original work except for the quotations and citations, which have been fully acknowledged. I also declare that it has not been previously and is not concurrently submitted for other degree at the Universiti Utara Malaysia or any other institution.

DEDICATION

I dedicated this research work to my beloved mother, Zainab Bt Hassan

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PERMISSION TO USE

AB STRAK

ABSTRACT

ACKNOWLEDGEMEhTT

DECLARATION

DEDICATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF APPENDICES

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

1.2 Problem Statement

1.3 Research Questions

1.4 Research Objectives

1.5 Conceptual Model

1.6 Theoretical Framework

1.6.1 Rational Choice Theory of Participaiton

1.6.2 Diffusion of Innovation Theory

1.6.3 Self-efficacy Theory

1.6.4 Trust Model

1.7 Significance of the Study

1.8 Scope of the Study

1.9 Definition of Key Terms

1. loorganization of Chapters

1.1 1 Summary

vii

xvii

xix

XX

CHAPTER TWO: BACKGROUND OF ELECTIONS IN NIGERIA

2.1 Lntroduction

2.2 An Overview of Nigeria

2.2.1 Economy

2.2.2 Political Landscape

2.3 Historical Overview of Electoral Commissions in Nigeria

2.4 An Overview of Independent National Electoral Commission

2.4.1 Structure and Authority

2.4.2 Methods of Voting in Nigeria

2.4.3 Challenges of Elections in Nigeria

2.5 Overview of e-Government Implementation in Nigeria

2.5.1 ICT in the Electoral Administration

2.5.2 Voters' Registration in Nigeria

2.5.3 e-Voter Registration during 2007 Elections

2.5.4 Problems of e-Voter Registration during 2007 Elections

2.5.5 e-Voter Registration during 201 1 General Elections

2.6 Institutional Challenges to e-Voting Adoption in Nigeria

2.7 Summary

CHAPTER THREE: LITERATURE REVIEW

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Strategic Position of e-Voting within e-Government

3.2.1 e-Administration

3.2.2 e-Democracy

3.2.3 Participation, as a Basic Component of Governance

3.2.4 e-Voting System and Increased Participation

3.3 Behavioral Intention

3.3.1 Intention to Participate in Election Using e-Voting System (ITP)

3.4 Existing e-Voting Adoption Models/Framework

3.5 Underpinning Theory

3.5.1 Rational Choice Theory of Voting Participation

a. Rational Choice as Game theory

b. Rational Choice and Altruism Concern

c. Collective Rationality

d. Group Mobilization Model

3.5.2 Diffusion of Innovation Theory

a. Perceived Trialability (TRB)

b. Perceived Observability (OBS)

c Perceived Ability to Use (PATU)

d. Perceived Relative Advantage (RA)

3.5.3 Trust ~ o d e l

a. Trust in the Technology (TIT)

b. Trust in Government Officials

3.5.4 Self-efficacy Theory

a. Computer Self-efficacy (CSE)

3.6 Demographic Factors 112

3.7 Hypothesis Development 115

3.7.1 Perceived Trialability (TRB) and Voters' Intention to Adopt e-Voting System 116

3.7.2 Perceived Observability (OBS) and Voters' Intention to Adopt e-Voting System 117

3.7.3 Perceived Ability to Use (PATU) and Voters' Intention to Adopt e-Voting System 118

3.7.4 Trust in the Technology (TIT) and Voters' Intention to Adopt e-Voting System 119

3.7.5 Trust in Government Officials and Voters' Intention to Adopt e-Voting System 121

3.7.6 Computer Self-efficacy (CSE) and Voters' Intention to Adopt e-Voting System 122

3.7.7 Empirical Association between the Independent Variables (TRB, OBS, TIT, CSE and PATU), Mediator (RA) and the Dependent Variable (ITP) 125

3.8 Summary 132

CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGY

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Research Design

4.2.1 Convergent Parallel Design

4.3 Quantitative Research Design

4.3.1 Population of the Study

4.3.2 Sample Size and Sampling Technique

4.4 Instrumentation

4.4.1 Operationalization of Constructs

4.4.2 Measurement of Study Constructs

4.4.3 Five (5) Points Likert Scale

4.5 Pilot Study

4.6 Questionnaire Administration

4.7 Qualitative Research Design

4.7.1 Face-to-Face Lnterviews

4.7.2 Selection of Participants

4.8 Content Analysis

4.8.1 Reliability and Validity

4.9 Potential Ethical Issues

4.10Results of Qualitative Pilot Study

4.1 1 Summary

CHAPTER FIVE: QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS

5.1 Introduction

5.2 Response Rate, Unengaged Response, Data Editing and Validation

5.2.1 Description of the Sample of Study

5.3 Data Normality Assessment

5.4 Justification for Using PLS Path Modeling

5.5 Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

5.5.1 Construct Validity

5.5.2 Discriminant Validity

5.5.3 Internal Consistency Reliability

5.6 Inner (Structural Model)

5.6.1 Resample Size

5.6.2 Main Effect

a. Restatement of Main Effect Hypotheses

b. Results of Main Effect Hypotheses

5.6.3 Analysis According to Demographic Variables

5.7 Mediation Effect

5.7.1 Direct Effect and Indirect Effect

a. Restatement of Indirect Effect Hypotheses path a

b. Results of Indirect Effect path a

5.7.2 Indirect Effect path b

a. Restatement of Indirect Effect Hypothesis path b

b. Results of Indirect Effect path b

5.7.3 Mediating Effects

a. Restatement of Mediating Effects' Hypotheses

b. Results of Mediating Effect

c. Direct Effect path c'

5.8 Coefficient of Determination (R2 value)

5.9 Effect Size (f)

5.1 OBlindfolding and Predictive Relevance (Q2)

5.1 1 Summary

CHAPTER SIX: QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS

6.1 Introduction

6.2 Interview Protocols

6.3 Data Analysis

6.4 Demographic Data

6.5 Factors with Potential Implications to Impose Decrease in Voter Turnout in a Drive to Adopt e-Voting System in Nigeria

6.5.1 Institutional Factor

a. Trust in the Government Officials

b. Trust in the Elected Government Officials (Politicians)

c. Bureaucratic Policy Orientation (Traditional Top-Down)

6.5.2 Challenge of Credible Electoral Management Body (EMB)

a. Constitutional Control

b. Technical Capacity

6.5.3 Socio-psychological Challenge

a. Illiteracy

b. Computer Literacy

c. Digital Divides

d. Beliefs System

6.5.4 Technological Challenges

a. Inadequate Information about the Proposed e-Voting System

b. Trialing the Technology

6.5.5 Infrastructural Challenge

a. Requisite Technological Facilities

b. Electricity Supply

6.6 Remedy to the Problems of Decrease in Voter Turnout in a Drive to Adopt e-Voting System

6.6.1 Strengthening Institutional Framework

a. Effective Policy Framework

b. Severe Anti-Corruption Laws

c. Absolute Independence of the Electoral Management Body

6.6.2 Effective Information Dissemination

6.6.3 Technological Attributes

6.6.4 Incremental Implementation

6.6.5 Provision of Adequate Requisite Facilities

6.7 Summary

CHAPTER SEVEN: SUMMARY, DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION

7.1 Introduction

7.2 Summary of Findings

xii

7.3 Research Question One: Effect of Do1 Constructs, Trusting Variables and Computer Self-efficacy on Voter's Intention to Adopt e-Voting System 257

7.3.1 Direct Effect of Perceived Trialability on Intention to Participate 257

7.3.2 Direct Effect of Perceived Observability on Intention to Participate 260

7.3.3 Direct Effect of Perceived Ability to Use on Intention to Participate262

7.3.4 Direct Effect of Trust in the Technology on Intention to Participate 264

7.3.5 Direct Effect of Trust in Electoral Government Officials on Intention to Participate 266

7.3.6 Effect of Trust in Politically Elected Government Officials on Intention to Participate 268

7.3.7 Direct Effect of Computer Self-efficacy on Intention to Participate 271

7.4 Research Question Two: Mediating Effect of Relative Advantage in the Relationship between Do1 Constructs, Trust in the Technology, and Computer Self-efficacy on Voter's Intention to Participate 273

7.4.1 Mediating Effect of Perceived Relative Advantage, A Determinant of Voting Participation 273

7.5 Research Question Three: Factors Affecting Participation in Election using e-Voting System 280

7.5.1 Institutional Factors 28 1

a. Credible Electoral Management Body (EMB) 281

b. Bureaucratic Policy Orientation (Traditional Top-Down) 283

7.5.2 Technological Factors 285

7.5.3 Infrastructural Factors 286

7.5.4 Socio-psychological Factors

a. Illiteracy

b. Digital Divides 29 1

c. Beliefs System 292

7.6 Research Question Four: Remedy for Potential Challenges of Voter Turnout in a Drive to Adopt e-Voting System 293

7.7 Theoretical Validation

7.8 Theoretical Contributions

7.9 Methodological Contributions 3 02

. . . X l l l

7.1 OPractical Contributions

7.1 1 Limitations and Future Research Direction

7.12 Conclusion

REFERENCES

Appendix A: Adapted Items

Appendix B: Questionnaire

Appendix C: Interview Protocol

Appendix D: Demographic Profile of Interviewees

xiv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Countries with e-Voting Projects 4

Table 1.2 Voters Turnout fiom 1999 - 20 15 (Presidential Elections) 8

Table 1.3 Voters Turnout from 1999 - 20 15 (Parliamentary Elections) 9

Table 1.4 Adult Literacy Rate in English by Geo-political Zones 26

Table 1.5 Wealth Quintiles according to Residence and Region, Nigeria 2008 27

Table 2.1 Election Management Bodies in Nigeria 39

Table 2.2 ICT Development Indicators in Nigeria 46

Table 2.3 Nigeria ICT Benchmarking Indicators 47

Table 3.1 Relationships between e-Government, e-Administration and e-Governance 61

Table 4.1 Research Question and Corresponding Research Design 134

Table 4.2 Number of Registered Voters as at 201 1 137

Table 4.3 Proportionate Distribution of Questionnaire 139

Table 4.4 Operationalization of Constructs 141

Table 4.5 Validity and Reliability of the Study Constructs 144

Table 4.6 Statistics of Qualitative Participants 148

Table 5.1 Questionnaire Distributions and Responses 154

Table 5.2 Summary of Demographic Variables of the Respondents 155

Table 5.3 Cross Loadings of the Study Variables 159

Table 5.4 Validity and Reliability of the Study Constructs 162

Table 5.5 Discriminant Validity 163

Table 5.6 Results of Main Effect between Endogenous and Exogenous Variables 173

Table 5.7 Results of Direct Effect between Exogenous and Endogenous Variables

for Sample of Low Educational Qualification 176

Table 5.8 Results of Direct Effect between Exogenous and Endogenous Variables

for Sample of High Educational Qualification 176

Table 5.9 Results of Direct Effect between Exogenous and Endogenous Variables

for Sample of Low Income 178

Table 5.10 Results of Direct Effect between Exogenous and Endogenous Variables

for Sample of High Income 178

Table 5.1 1 Results of Indirect Effect Path a

Table 5.12 Results of Indirect Effect path b

Table 5.13 Results of Mediating Relationships (Indirect)

Table 5.14 Results of Total Effect

Table 5.15 Results of Direct Effect path c'

Table 5.16 Effect Size for Individual Variables based on Cohen (1988)

Table 5.17 Summary of Hypothesized Relationships and Findings

Table 6.1 Summary of Demographic Information of the Interviewees

Table 6.2 Response on Institutional Challenges

Table 6.3 Descriptive Statistic of Respondents' Discussions on Digital Divides

Table 6.4 Descriptive Statistic of Respondents' Discussions on Beliefs System

Table 6.5 Descriptive Statistic of Respondents' Discussions on Absolute

Independence of the Electoral Management Body

xvi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1. Conceptual model of e-voting adoption

Figure 1.2. Map of Nigerian geo-political zones

Figure 1.3. Map ofNigeria showing extent of insurgence by State

Figure 2.1. Map of Nigeria within Africa

Figure 2.2. Map of Nigeria

Figure 3.1. Model of e-voting w i t h e-government initiative

Figure 3.2. Convergent Parallel Design

Figure 5.1. PLS Structural model

Figure 5.2. Main effect bootstrap

Figure 5.3. Bootstrap between the IVs and mediator

Figure 5.4. Model of e-voting adoption

Figure 6.1. Interview and data management stages

Figure 6.2. Qualitative model of potential challenges of e-voting adoption

Figure 6.3. Response on trust in the electoral government officials

Figure 6.4. How respondents talked about trust in politicians

Figure 6.5. Interviwees discussion about bureaucratic policy orientation

Figure 6.6. How respondent talked about constitutional control

Figure 6.7. Descriptive statistics of respondents' discussion on technical capacity

Figure 6.8. How respondent talked about illiteracy

Figure 6.9. How respondent talked about computer literacy

Figure 6.10. How interviewees discussed about inadequate information about the

technology

Figure 6.1 1. Descriptive statistic of respondent discussion about trialing the

technology

Figure 6.12. Summary of how respondents'discussed on requisite facilities

Figure 6.13. Electricity supply

Figure 6.14. Hierarchical themes on the solutions for the potential challenges of

e-voting adoption

Figure 6.15. How the interviewees talked about effective policy framework

xvii

Figure 6.16. How the interviewees talked about severe anti-corruption policy 242

Figure 6.17. How the interviwees talked about information dissirnination 245

Figure 6.18. Summery of how respondents talked about technological attributes 247

Figure 6.19. Summay of how the interviewees talked about incremental

implementation 250

Figure 6.20. Summary of how interviewees talked about adequate requisite facilities 252

xviii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A: Adapted items

Appendix B: Questionnaire

Appendix C: Interview Protocol

Appendix D: Demographic Profile of the Interviewees

ACE AFIS ASE AVE BelS BPO CFA CIA CompL consc CSE DDCM d f DigD Do1 DRE DV ECN ElecS EMB E-Official e-Voting f FCT FEC FEDECO FRN G2B G2C G2E G2G GAIS GDP GSGSG ICT IDEA IDT IFES

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Alliance for Credible Election Automated Fingerprint Identification System Assisted self-efficacy Average variance extracted Belief systems Bureaucratic policy orientation Confirmatory factor analysis Central Intelligence Agency Computer literacy Constitutional control Computer Self-efficacy Direct Data Capture Machine Degree of freedom Digital divides Difision of Innovation Direct Recording Electronic Dependent variable Electoral Commission ofNigeria Electricity supply Electoral Management Body Electoral official Electronic voting Effect size Federal Capital Territory, Abuja Federal Electoral Commission Federal Electoral Commission Federal Republic of Nigeria Government to Business Government to Citizens Government to Employees Government to Government Government administration information system Gross Domestic Product Ghazali Shafie Graduate School of Government Information and communication technology International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance Innovation Diffusion Theory International Foundation for Election Systems

I llit INEC InInf IS ISE ITP IV i-Voting MMS MPCU MVA NAN NCA NEC NECON NITDA NTP NYSC OBS OMR OSBS OYAGSB PATU PC PC1 PEOU PFB PLS PLS-SEM P-Official PSNet PU

Q2

R~ RA RECs

ReqF RERC REVS SET

Illiteracy Independent National Electoral Commission Inadequate information Information system Individual self-efficacy Intention to Participate Independent variable Internet voting Multimedia Message Service Model of PC Utilization Missing value analysis News Agency of Nigeria Nigerian Communication Act National Electoral Commission National Electoral Commission of Nigeria National Information Technology Development Agency National Telecommunication Policy National Youth Service Corps Perceived Observability Optical Mark Reader Open Secret Ballot System Othrnan Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business Perceived Ability to Use Composite reliability Perceived Characteristics of Innovation Perceived ease of use Perceived functional benefit Partial Least Square Partial Least Square - Structural Equation Model Party official Public Service Network Perceived usefulness Predictive relevance Coeff~cient of determination Relative advantage Resident Electoral Commissioners Requisite facilities Registration and Election Review Committee Remote electronic voting system Self-Efficacy Theory

xxi

TAM TechC TEI TEO TIT TPB TRA TRB UN UTAUT UUM VAP VIF

P

Technology Adoption Model Technical capacity The Electoral h t i tu te Trust in the Electoral Government Officials Trust in the Technology Theory of Planned Behavior Theory of Reason Action Perceived Trialability United Nation Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Universiti Utara Malaysia Voting age population Variance inflation factor Standardized path coefficient

xxii

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

In Nigeria, e-applications in both private and public sector organizations are at various

stage of evolution. Stream of literature have reported instant development of such e-

applications. For instance, e-banking has been the most fhvored private sector with

remarkably advanced stage of e-application (e.g. Agwu, Atuma, Ikpefan, & Iyoha, 20 14;

Agwu & Carter, 2014; Shaikh & Karjaluoto, 2015; DASH & Tech, 2014). Other areas

receiving increasing attention include e-commerce (Egbokhare, Ukaoha, & Chiemeke,

201 1 ; Ayo, Adewoye, & Oni, 20 11 ; Gholarni, Ogun, Koh, & Lim, 20 10).

Inversely to private sector organizations, e-application in public sector also known as e-

government is at evolving stage and is only beginning to be researched (Amagoh, 201 5).

Example of areas receiving attention on e-application in public sector include e-learning

(Edewor, Imhonopi, & Urim, 20 14; Ayeni & Odion, 20 1 I), e-recruitment (Odumeru, 20 12;

Omolawal, 2015; Sanusi, & Martadha, 2012; Sanusi & Mohamed, 2012) and e-licencing

(Obidinnu, Ekechukwu, & Ejiofor, 2013; Faniran & Olaniyan, 2009). Although recent

development of e-voting adoption in Nigeria attracts a stream of literature (Adebayo,

Ugiomoh, & AbdulMalik, 2013; Ahmad, Abdullah, & Arshad, 20 15a; Ahmad, Abdullah,

& Arshad, 2015b; Ayo, Adebiyi, & Fatudimu, 2008; Ayo & Ekong, 2008), paucity of

emperical study is evident thereby craving for more investiagtion.

The contents of

the thesis is for

internal user

only

REFERENCES

Abdulhamid, S. M., Adebayo, 0. S., Ugiomoh, D. O., & AbdulMalik, M. D. (2013, April). The design and development of real-time e-voting system in Nigeria with emphasis on security and result veracity. In I. J. Computer Network and Information Security, 5,9-18.

Aborisade, S. (2014, April 1). Senator divided over electronic voting. Punch. Retrieved fiom http://www.punchng.com/news/electoral-act-senators-divided-over- electronic-voting/

Acuna, E., & Rodriguez, C. (2004). The treatment of missing values and its effect on classifier accuracy. In Classzjkation, clustering, and data mining applications (pp. 639-647). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

Adebayo, 0 . S., Ugiomoh, D. O., & AbdulMalik, M. D. (2013). The design and development of real-time e-voting system in Nigeria with emphasis on security and result veracity. International Journal of Computer Network and Information Security (IJCNIS), 5(5), 9 - 18.

Adeleke, I. A. (2015). Challenges of ICT and election management in rural areas in Nigeria. Retrieved fiom http://eprints.covenantuniversity.edu.ng/5273/1/adecucen20 15.pdf

Adesola, S. A. (2012, September). Entrenching democracy and good governance: The role of ICT. In J. A. Opara, A. Biagini, M. 0. N. Obagah, G. Motta, A. N. Nosike, R. R. S. Hidalgo, K. A. Anele & N. Shahmohamrnadi (Eds.), International Congress on Social & Cultural Studies (pp. 423 - 430). Port Harcourt, Nigeria.

Adesua, S. (2010, June 14). A nation and its election rigging culture. African Herald Express. Retrieved fiom http://a~canheraldexpress.com~biog6/20 10/06/14/a- nation-and-its-election-rigging-culture/

Adeyinka, T., & Olasina, G. (2012). Voters' perception of the adequacy and suitability of e-voting in the Nigeria polity. Handbook ofresearch on e-government in emerging economies: Adoption, e-participation, and legal frameworks. Nigeria: University of Ilorin Press.

Adhiutama, A. (201 1). Behavior intention towards the adoption of innovative household sanitary ware: A case study of Jakarta, Indonesia. The Asian Journal of Technology Management, 4(4), 1 15-125.

Aganval, R., & Prasad, J. (1998a). A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Information Systems Research, 9(2), 204 - 2 15.

Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1998b). The antecedents and consequents of user perceptions in information technology adoption. Decision Support Systems, 22(1), 15-29.

Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V., & Stair, R. M. (2000). Research report: The evolving relationship between general and specific computer self-efficacy-an empirical assessment. Information Systems Research, 11 (4), 4 18 - 430.

Agbaje, A. & Adejumobi, S. (2006). Do votes count? The travails of electoral politics in Nigeria. Africa Development, 31 (3), 2544 .

Agwu, M. E., & Carter, A. L. (2014). Mobile phone banking in Nigeria: benefits, problems and prospects. International Journal of Business and Commerce, 3(6), 50 - 70.

Agwu, M. E., Atuma, O., Ikpefan, 0 . A., & Iyoha, F. 0. (2014). Adoption triggers and barriers of mobile banking services in Nigeria. International Review of Social Sciences, 2(9), 374 - 3 86.

Ahmad, S., Abdullah, S. A. J., & Arshad, R. B. (2015a). Issues and challenges of transition to e-voting technology in Nigeria. Public Policy and Administration Research, 5(4). 95 - 102.

Ahmad, S., Abdullah, S. A. J., & Arshad, R. B. (2015b). Participation and voting policy process in Nigeria: A qualitative study. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(4). 362 - 374.

Aisedionlen, A. (2012, April 2). Ending election rigging in Nigeria. Nigeria world. Retrieved fi-om http://nigeriaworld.com/articles/20 12/apr/02 1 . h t d

Ajayi, A. (2014, November 3). Premium Time. Retrieved fi-om http://www.premiumtirnesng.com/news/headlines/l70534-borno-govt-raises- a1arm-says-boko-haram-may-capture-entire-three-north-east-states-in-days.htd

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-2 1 1.

Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Chicago: Dorsey Press.

A~zen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888-91 8.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1 980). Understanding attitudes andpredicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Akman, I., Yazici, A., Mishra, A., & Arifoglu, A. (2005). e-Government: A global view and an empirical evaluation of some attributes of citizens. Government Information Quarterly, 22(2), 239- 257.

Alabi, M. (2009). Electoral reforms and democratic consolidation in Nigeria: The Electoral Act 2006. CEU Political Science Journal, 4(2), 278-304.

Alam, K. M. R., & Tamura, S. (2012, May). Electronic voting: Scopes and limitations. In Informatics, Electronics & Vision (KIEV), 2012 International Conference on (pp. 525-529). IEEE.

Albers, S. (2010). PLS and success hctor studies in marketing. In V. Esposito Vinzi, W.W. Chin, J. Henseler & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook ofpartial least squares: concepts, methods and applications (Springer handbooks of computational statistics series, vol. 11) (pp. 409-425). New York: Springer.

Albert, I. 0. (2009). Whose e-governance? A critique of online citizen engagement in Afiica. African Journal ofPolitica1 Science and international Relations, 3(4), 133- 141.

Al-Busaidi, H. A. S. (2012). A model of intention to use mobile government services (Doctoral dissertation, Victoria University). Retrieved fiom http://vuir.vu.edu.au/2 1309/1/Hamed-Albusaidi.pdf

Aldrich, John H. (1993). Rational choice and turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 37(1), 246-278.

Alemika, E. E. 0. (20 1 1). Post electoral violence in Nigeria: Emerging trend and lessons. (Electoral Reform Committee Report, 2008, Vol. 1: 19). Retrieved fiom http://cleenfoundation.blogspot.cornl2011/07/post-election-violence-in- nigeria.htm1

Alomari, M., Woods, P., & Sandhu, K. (2012). Predictors for e-government adoption in Jordan: Deployment of an empirical evaluation based on a citizen-centric approach. Information Technology & People, 25(2), 207 - 234.

Alsaghier, H., Ford, M., Nguyen, A., & Hexel, R. (2008). A conceptual model of citizens' trust in egovemment. In 4th International Conference on e-Government (pp. 35 - 42). Melbourne, Australia: Academic Conferences Ltd.

Alvarez, R. M., & Hall, T. E. (2004). Point, click, and vote: The future of Internet voting. Washington D.C: Brookings Institution Press.

Amagoh, F. (2015). Determinants of e-government diffusion in Nigeria An examination of theoretical models. Information Development, DOI: 10.1 1771026666691 5593330.

Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 4 1 1 - 423.

Arah, U. (2010, July). Using ICTs for national transformation: Focus on Nigeria's political system and elections. In Uwadia, C., Aderounmu, S., Folajimi, Y., & Ejiofor, V. (Eds.), Realizing a Stable Democratic Political System in Nigeria: IT Tools and Strategies (RESDEMIT 2010) (Vol. 21, pp. 3 1 - 36). Asaba, Delta State, Nigeria.

Ariyomo, T. (2012, September 1). Nigeria's electoral reform: Can electronic voting work?, Premium Times. Retrieved fi-om http://premiumtimesng.~om/opinion~98573- nigerias-electoral-reform-can-electronic-voting-work-by-tunji-ariyomo.html

Arrison, S., & Vasquez, V. (2006). Upgrading America's ballot box: The rise of e-voting (2nd ed.). Pacific Research Institute: San Francisco, CA.

Asogwa, B. E. (2013). Electronic government as a paradigm shift for efficient public services: Opportunities and challenges for Nigerian government. Library Hi Tech, 31(1), 141-159.

Auerbach, C. F., & Silverstein, L. B. (2003). Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New York: New York University Press.

Avgerou, C. (1998). How can IT enable economic growth in developing countries? Information Technology for Development, 8(1), 15-28.

Avgerou, C. (2008). Information systems in developing countries: A critical research review. Journal of Information Technology, 23, 133-146.

Avgerou, C., Ganzaroli, A., Poulymenakou, A., & Reinhard, N. (2007, May). ICT and citizens' trust in government: Lessons fi-om electronic voting in Brazil. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries. SBo Paulo, Brazil: Akpan-Obong & Parmentier.

Awopeju, A. (20 12). 20 1 1 Presidential election and the political participation in Nigeria. Canadian Social Science, 8(2), 96- 103.

Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of co-operation. New York: Basic Books.

Ayeni, J. A., & Odion, A. (201 1). Development of a semi-automated electoral system-case study: Nigeria electoral system. Electronic Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology (dCSIT), 4(1), 1- 4.

Ayo, C., & Azeta, A. (2009). A Framework for Voice-Enabled M-Voting System. Nigeria a Case Study. In 9th European Conference on E-Government (ECEG 2009), ed. Dan Remenyi. Dublin: ECEG, 96-1 04.

Ayo, C. K., & Ekong, U. (2008, July). e-Voting implementation in Nigeria: Prospects & challenges. In Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on eGovemment 10- 1 1 July 2008, Ecole Polytechnique, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Ayo, C. K., Adebiyi, A. A., & Fatudimu, I. T. (2008). e-Democracy: A requirement for a successful e-voting and e-government implementation in Nigeria. International Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences, 4(3), 3 10-3 18.

Ayo, C., Adebiyi, A. A., & Sofoluwe, A. B. (2008). e-Voting implementation in Nigeria: The success factors. In Salawu, R. I., Akinade, A., & Adetona, S. 0. (Eds), Curbing security violence in Nigeria: The role of security profession (pp. 50-60). Lagos Nigeria: Institute of Security Nigeria.

Babakus, E., & Mangold, W. G. (1992). Adapting the SERVQUAL scale to hospital services: An empirical investigation. Health Services Research, 26(6), 767 - 786.

Baiyewu, L. (2012, July 1). INEC: Between electoral officers' franchise and credibility, Punch. Retrieved fiom http://www.punchng.comlpolitics/inec-between-electoral- officers-franchise-and-credibility1

Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9), 1 175- 1 184.

Bandura, A. (1 994). Self-efficacy. In H. Friedman (Series Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mental Health: vol4. Encyclopedia ofHuman Behavior (pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press.

Bandura, A., & Adams, N. E. (1977). Analysis of self-efficacy theory of behavioural change. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1(4), 287-3 10.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in Social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1 173-1 182.

Basu, S. (2004). e-Government and developing countries: An overview. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 18(1), 109-132.

Batalli, M. (201 1). Simplification of public administration through use of ICT and other tools. European Journal of e-Practice, 12(MarchlApril).

Beach, L. R., & Mitchell, T. R. (1978). A contingency model for the selection of decision strategies. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 439-449.

Beierle, T. C., & Cayford, J. (2002). Democracy in practice: Public participation in environmental decisions. Washington DC: Resources for the Future Press.

BClanger, F., & Carter, L. (2008). Trust and risk in e-government adoption. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 1 7(2), 165- 176.

Belanger, F., & Carter, L. (2010a). The impacts ofthe digital divide on citizens' intentions to use internet voting. International Journal on Advances in Internet Technology, 3(3 & 4).

BClanger, F., & Carter, L. (2010b, February). The digital divide and internet voting acceptance. In Digital Society, 201 0. ICDS'I 0. Fourth International Conference on Digital Society (pp. 307-3 10). IEEE.

Bellis, M. (n.d.). The history of voting machines. Retrieved fi-om httv:Ninventors.about.com/librarv/weekl~/aal11300b.htm

Benbasat, I., & Barki, H. (2007). Quo vadis, TAM? Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 2 1 1-2 1 8.

Bhatt, N., & Aggarwal, A. (Eds) (20 1 1). e-Governance Techno-Behavioural Implications. Retrieved fi-om www.excelpublish.com

Bilbao-Osorio, B., Dutta, S., & Lanvin, B. (2014). The global information technology report 2013 - Growth and jobs in a hyperconnected world. Retrieved fi-om http://www3 .weforum.org/docs~F-GITR-Report

Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M., & Robson, IS. (2001). Focus groups in social research. London: Sage.

Breaking news (2013, May 14). Jonathan declares state of emergency in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa State. Sahara Reporters. Retrieved fi-om http://saharareporters.com/news-page/breaking-news-jonathan-declares-state- emergency-borno-yobe-and-adamawa-state

Browder, R. K. (2005). Internet voting with initiatives and referendums: Stumbling towards direct democracy. Seattle UL Rev., 29,485.

Brown, D. (2005). Electronic government and public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 71 (2), 24 1-254.

Burmester, M., & Magkos, E. (2003). Towards secure andpractical e-elections in the new era Secure electronic voting (pp. 63-76). US: Springer.

Cao, X., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2005). The intended and actual adoption of online purchasing: A brief review of recent literature. Retrieved fi-om Institute of Transportation Studies Website http://escholarship.org/uc/item/45q5plvb.pdf

Carter, L. (2006). Politicalparticipation in a digital age: An integratedperspective on the impacts of the internet on voter turnout. (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University). Retrieved fi-om http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-04252006- 044422/unrestricted/LCarter Dissertation etd v3.pdf

Carter, L., & Belanger, F. (2004, January). Citizen adoption of electronic government initiatives. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 10-pp). IEEE.

Carter, L., & BClanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 5-25.

Carter, L., & Belanger, F. (20 12). Internet voting and political participation: An empirical comparison of techno logical and political factors. A CM SIGMIS Database, 43(3), 26-46.

Carter, L., & Campbell, R. (201 1). The impact of trust and relative advantage on internet voting diffusion. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 6(3), 7-8.

Carter, L., Shaupp, L. C., Hobbs, J., & Campbell, R. (201 1). The role of security and trust in the adoption, of online tax filing. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 5(4), 303-3 18.

Carter, L., & Weerakkody, V. (2008). e-Government adoption: A cultural comparison. Information Systems Frontiers, 10(4), 473-482.

Chang, S. C., & Tung, F. C. (2008). An empirical investigation of students' behavioural intentions to use the online learning course websites. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 71-83.

Chen, J. V., Yen, D. C., & Chen, K. (2009). The acceptance and diffusion of the innovative smart phone use: A case study of a delivery service company in logistics. Information & Management, 46(4), 24 1-248.

Chen, K., Chen, J. V., & Yen, D. C. (201 1). Dimensions of self-efficacy in the study of smart phone acceptance. Computer Standards & Intei$aces, 33(4), 422-43 1.

Chen, L.-D., & Tan, J. (2004). Technology adaptation in e-commerce. European Management Journal, 22(1), 74-86.

Cherkasky, T., Greenbaum, J., Mambrey, P., & Pors, J. K. (2000). Introduction to the Proceedings of PDC 2000 the sixth biennial Participatory Design Conference. Paper presented at the PDC 2000 Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, vii-ix. New York: CPSR.

Chien, T. C. (2012). Computer self-efficacy and factors influencing e-learning effectiveness. European Journal of Training and Development, 36(7), 670-686.

Chin, W. W. (2003). A permutation procedure for multi-group comparison of PLS models. In Vilares M, Tenenhaus M, Coelho PS, Esposito Vinzi V, Morineau A (eds) Focus on customers: Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on PLS and Related Methods (PLS'03) (pp 3343). Decisia, Paris.

Chin, W.W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In Marcoulides, G.A. (Ed.), Modem Methods for Business Research (pp. 295-336). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Chuo, Y. H., Tsai, C. H., Lan, Y. L., & Tsai, C. S. (201 1). The effect of organizational support, self-efficacy, and computer anxiety on the usage intention of e-learning system in hospital. African Journal of Business Management, 5(14), 55 18-5523.

Churchill Jr, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, W I , 64-73.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Coleman, S., & Gotze, J. (2001). Bowling together: Online public engagement in policy deliberation (pp. 39-5 0). London: Hansard Society.

Colesca, S. (2009). Increasing e-trust: A solution to minimize risk in e-government adoption. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 41 (I), 3 1-44.

Collier, P., & Vicente, P. C. (2014). Votes and violence: Evidence fiom a field experiment in Nigeria. The Economic Journal, 124(574), F327-F355.

Campbell, D. T. (1963). Social attitudes and other acquired behavioral dispositions. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science. (Vol. 6, pp. 94-172). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS quarterly, 189-2 1 1.

Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1986). Emotional Reaction to the Economy: I'm mad as hell and I'm not goingt to take it anymore. American Journal of Political Science 30: 50-78.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4 ed.). Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York: Pearson.

Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. ( 201 1). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.

Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.

DASH, M., & Tech, M. (2014). Determinants of customers' adoption of mobile banking: An empirical study by integrating diffusion of innovation with attitude. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 1 P(3). http://www.arraydev.comlcommerce/Jibc/20 14- 12hlanoranjanDashv2.pdf

Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).

de Jong, M., van Hoof, J., & Gosselt, J. (2008). Voters' perceptions of voting technology: Paper ballots versus voting machine with and without paper audit trail. Social Science Computer Review, 26(4), 399-4 10.

deMarrais, K., & Lapan, S. D. (2004). Foundations for research methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Dewa, D. (2009). Factors affecting voting behavior and voting patterns in Zimbabwe's 2008 harmonized elections. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 3(1 I), 490-496.

Devi, J. M. (2009). Towards an understanding of the factors influencing the acceptance and diffusion of e-government services. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 7(4), 391 - 402.

Dictson, D., & Ray, D. (2000). The modem democratic revolution: An objective survey of internet-based elections. The George Bush School of Government and Public Service, Texas A & M University. www. SecurePoll.com

Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and internet survey: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Done, R. S. (2002). Internet voting: Bringing elections to the desktop. In: Abramson, M. A. and Morin, T. L. (2003). e-Government (237 -265). USA: Rowman & Littlefield.

Doronina, 0. (1995). Fear of computers: Its nature, prevention, and cure. Russian Social Science Review, 36,79-95.

Durotoye, A. (2015). Nigeria's 2015 presidential election: Between democratic consolidation and, change. European Scientific Journal, 11 (1 9) 169 - 184.

Eagly, A. H. & Chaiken, S. (1993). The Psychology of attitudes. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Eckstein, H. (1992). Rationality and hstration. In Hany Eckstein (Ed.), Regarding Politics: Essay on Political Theory Stability and Change. Berkeley: University of California Press

Edewor, P., Imhonopi, D., & Urim, U. M. (2014). ICTs and sustainable development of higher education in Nigeria: Rewriting the ugly narrative. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 4(1), 357-363.

Efion, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1993). An Introduction to the Bootstrap. New York: Chapman and Hall.

Egbokhare, F., Ukaoha, K., & Chiemeke, S. (201 1). e-Commerce adoption in Nigeria. In Digital Enterprise and Information Systems (pp. 78-86). Springer: Berlin Heidelberg.

Eggers, W. D. (2005). Government 2.0: Using technology to improve education, cut red tape, reduce gridlock, and enhance democracy. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

Ejue, J. B., & Ekanem, S. A. (201 1). Voter right and credible election in Nigeria: The imperative of rethinking the content of citizenship education. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1, 286-294.

Elster, J., & Hylland, A. (Eds.) (1989). Foundations of social choice theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Emad A. S., Knight, GHT, M., & Refai, H. (2010). e-Voting systems: A tool for e- democracy. Management Research and Practice, 2(3), 264-274.

Erubami, M. (2012, September 9). The Guardian Imperative of Electronic Voting in 2015 Elections. Sunday Magazine. Retrieved fiom http://www.ngrguardiannews. com/index.php?option=com~content&view=article &id=98 177:imperatives-of-electronic-voting-in-20 15-elections- &catid=l04:sunday-magazine&Itemid=567

Fagotto, E., & Fung, A. (2009). Sustainingpublic engagement: Embedded deliberation in local communities. East Hartford CT: Everyday Democracy & Kettering Foundation.

Faniran, S., & Olaniyan, K. (2009, November). e-Governance diffusion in Nigeria: The case for citizens' demand. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Theory and practice of electronic governance (pp. 145- 149). ACM.

Faniran, S ., & Olaniyan, K. (20 1 1, September). Strengthening democratic practice in Nigeria: A case for e-voting. In Preceding of the 5'" International Conference on Theory and Practice ofElectronic Governance ICEGOV2OI I (pp. 337-340) ACM. Tallinn, Estonia.

Feddersen, T. J., & Pesendorfer, W. (1999). Abstention in elections with asymmetric information and diverse preferences. American Political Science Review, 93(2), 381-398.

Fedderson, T. J., & Sandroni, A. (2006). The theory of participation in elections. The American Economic Review, 96(4), 1271- 1282.

Feng, H.-Y. (2012). Key factors influencing users' intentions of adopting renewable energy technologies. Academic Research International, 2(2), 156- 168.

Ferejohn, J. A., & Florina, M. P. (1974). The paradox ofnot voting: A decision theoretical analysis. American Political Science Review, 68, 525 - 536.

Fernandez, E. B., La Red, D. L., & Pelhez, J. I. (2013). A conceptual approach to secure electronic elections based on patterns. Government Information Quarterly, 30(1) 64-73.

Fichman, R. G. (1992, December). Information technology diffusion: A review of empirical research. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, (ICIS) (pp. 195-206).

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1974). Attitudes toward objects as predictors of single and multiple behavioral criteria. Psychological Review, 81,59-74.

Folasade-Koyi, A. (2014, April 2). Electronic voting divides Senate, The Sun. Retrieved from http://sunnewsonline. corn/new/?p=5 8443

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Joumal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.

Fu, J. R., Fam, C. K., & Chao, W. P. (2006). Acceptance of electronic tax filing: A study of taxpayer intentions. Information & Management, 43(1), 109-126.

Fung, A. (2009). Empoweredparticipation: Reinventing urban democracy. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.

Galimoto, M. S., Harnre, G. A., Kaasbarll, J., & Sandvand, J. (2008). Competencies and learning for management information systems-the case of a health information system in MalaGi. In A. 0. Bada & P. Musa (Eds.), IFIP WG 94: Towards An ICT Research Agenda for African Development (pp. 94-109). Birmingham, USA: University of Alabama.

Gano, G. (2013). The new face of government: Publics and policymaking online. [Book Review]. Joumal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 23, 755-758.

Gefen D., & Straub, D. W. (2000). The relative importance of perceived ease of use in IS adoption: A study of ecommerce adoption. Journal of Association for Information Systems, 1(8), 1-30.

Geisser, S. (1974). A predictive approach to the random e m s model. Biometrika, 61(1), 101-107.

Geys, B. (2006). Explaining voter turnout: A review of aggregate-level research. Electoral Studies, 25,637 - 663.

Gholarni, R., Ogun, A., Koh, E., & Lim, J. (2010). Factors affecting e-payment adoption in Nigeria. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), 8(4), 5 1-67.

Goldsmith, B. (201 2). Electronic voting and counting technologies: A guide to conducting feasibility studies. Washington, DC: International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES).

Grafstein, R. (2002). Choice-free rationality: A positive theory ofpolitical behavior. USA: University of Michigan Press.

Grant, D., Hall, R., Wailes, N., & Wright, C. (2006). The false promise of technological determinism: the case of enterprise resource planning systems. New Technology, Work and Employment, 21, 2- 15.

Greenbaum, J. M., & Kyng, M. (1991). Design at work: Cooperative design of computer systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gutowska, A. (2007). Research in online trust: Trust taxonomy as a multi-dimensional model. Technical Report, School of Computing and Information Technology, University o f Wolverhampton. Available at http://www.scit.wlv.ac.ukl-in0345lResearch. htm.

Hair, J. F. J., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). California: Sage.

Hair, J. F. J., Wolfmbarger, M. F., Ortinau, D. J., & Bush, R. P. (2009). Essentials of Marketing Research (2nd ed.). New York: Mcgraw Hill.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.). Edinburgh Gate, Harlow: Pearson.

Hair, J. F., Bush, R. P., & Ortinau, D. J. (2003). Marketing Research within a changing information environment (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Pieper, T., & Ringle, C. M. (2012). The use ofpartial least squares structural equation modeling in strategic management research: A review of past practices and recommendations for future applications. Long Range Planning, 45, 320-340.

Hall, B. H. (2004). Innovation and diffusion (No. ~10212) . National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved fi-om http://sites- fmal.uclouvain.be/eco~W~OCTORALWS2OO4hrunolad0ption/handbook%2O oP/o20Innovation.pdf

Harsanyi, J. C. (1969). Rational choice models of political behavior vs. hctionalist and conformist theories. World Politics, 21(4), 5 13-538.

Harsanyi, J. C. (1977). Morality and the theory of rational behavior. Social Research 44(4), 623-656.

Harsanyi, J. C. (1986). Advances in understanding rational behavior. In Jon Elster, et al., Rational Choice. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Hassan, T. A. (20 1 1, November 3). Nigeria: 20 1 5 - Representatives, Jega mull electronic voting. AllAfrica. Retrieved fi-om http://allafiica.com~stories/20 1 1 1 1030234. html

Hauser, R., Paul R., & Bradley, J. (2012). Computer self-efficacy, anxiety, and learning in online versus face to face medium. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11 (I), 14 1 - 1 54.

Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408-420.

Hayes, A. F. (20 13). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.

Hazlett, S. A., & Hill, F. (2003). e-Government: the realities of using IT to transform the public sector. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 13(6), 445-452.

He, Q., Duan, Y., Fu, Z., & Li, D. (2006). An innovation adoption study of online e- payment in Chinese companies. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 4(1), 48-69.

Heikkila, T., & Isett, K. R. (2007). Citizen involvement and performance management in special-purpose governments. Public Administration Review, 67(2), 238-248.

Helbig, N., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Ferro, E. (2005). Understanding the complexity of electronic government: Implications fiom the digital divide literature. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 89-97.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., & Sinkovics, R.R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20,277- 320.

H e m o n , P. (1986). Do parties make a difference? The role of party organization in congressional elections. Journal of Political, 48, 589 - 615.

Hindess, B. (1988). Choice rationality and social theory. London: Unwin Hyrnan

Hofhan, D., Novak, T. P., & Scholsser, A. (2000). The evolution of the digital divide: How gaps in Internet access may impact electronic commerce. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 5(3). doi: 10.1 1 1 1/j. 1083- 6101.2000.tb00341 .x.

Holden, R. J., & Karsh, B. T. (2010). The technology acceptance model: Its past and its future in health care. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 43(1), 159- 172.

Hornik, R. (2004). Some reflections on diffusion theory and the role of Everett Rogers. Journal of Health Communication, 9(S l), 143- 148.

House Committee on Diaspora Affairs Website. (2012). Nigerians in diaspora collect signatures to support voting right. Retrieved from http://diasporacommittee.com/index.php/mdia-center/news-and-events/95- nigerians-in-diaspora-coUect-signatures-to-support-voting-right

Hsu, M. K., Wang, S. W., & Chiu, K. K.-S. (2008). Influence of attitude, anxiety and self- efficacy toward statistics and technology on statistical package software usage behavior. In South West Decision Sciences Institute Conference.

Hylland, A. (1989). The purpose and significance of social choice theory: Some general remarks and an application to the 'Lady Chatterley problem'. In Elster, J. and Hylland, A. (Ed). Foundations of social choice theory. New York: Cambridge University Press & Universitetsforlaget

Igbaria, M., & Iivari, J. (1995). The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage. Omega Int. J. Mgmt Sci., 23(6), 587-605.

INEC Website. (n.d.). Elections: We are on the right track - INEC Chairman. Retrieved fiom http://www.inecnigeria.org/elections-we-are-on-the-right-track-inec- chainnanl

INEC Website. (n.d.). Information for voters. Retrieved fiom http://www.inecnigeria.org/information-for-voters/

INEC, & FES Nigeria. (2011). Voter apathy and the 2011 elections in Nigeria. Abuja, Nigeria: Author.

International Institute of Democracy and Electoral Assistance [International IDEA] (20 15). Voter turnout data for Nigeria. Retrieved fi-om http://www.idea.int/vtlcountryview.cfm?CountryCode=NG

Irvin, R. A., & Stansbury, J. (2004). Citizen participation in decision-making: is it worth the effort? Public Administration Review, 64(1), 55-65.

Jackson, C. M., Chow, S., & Leitch, R. A. (1997). Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use an information system. Decision Sciences, 28(2), 357- 389.

Jaeger, P. T., & Thompson, K. M. (2003). e-Government around the world: Lessons, challenges, and future directions. Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 389- 394.

Jarvenpaa, S. L., Tractinsky, N., & Vitale, M. (2000). Consumer trust in an internet store. Information Technology and Management, 1,45-71.

Jefferson, D., Rubin, A. D., Simons, B., & Wagner, D. (2004). A security analysis of the secure electronic registration and voting experiment (SERVE). New York Times (http://www.servesecurityreport.org).

Jega, A. M., & Hillier, M. M. (2012). Improving elections in Nigeria: Lessons fiom 201 1 and looking to 201 5. In Africa Programme Meeting Summary, pp 1- 12. Retrieved fiom http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/fdes/c~tha~ouse/public/Researc~Afi-icdO4 07 12summary.pdf

Jegede, A. J., Aimufua, G. I. O., & Akosu, N. I. (2009). Electronic voting: A panacea for electoral irregularities in developing countries. Journal of Mobile Communication, 3(2), 22-33.

Johnson, E. J., & Payne, J. W. (1 985). Effort and accuracy in choice. Management Science, 31(4), 395-414.

Jones, D. W. (2004). Auditing elections. Communications of the ACM, 47(10), 46-50.

Jose, P. E. (20 13). Doing statistical mediation and moderation. New York: Guilford Press.

Karahanna, E., Aganval, R., & Angst, C. M. (2006). Reconceptualizing compatibility beliefs in technology acceptance research. MIS Quarterly, 30, 78 1-804.

Kersting, N., & Baldersheim, H. (2004). Electronic voting and democracy: A comparative analysis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Keynes, J. M. (1936). The general theory of employment, interest and money. London: Macmillan.

Khorshidi, G. R. (2012). The role of trust in e-commerce relational exchange: A unified model. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporaiy Research in Business, 4, 230- 242.

Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles andpractice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.

Koffort, K. J., & Miller, J. B. (Eds) (1991). Social norms and economic institutions. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press

Kolachalam, S. (2002, November). An overview of e-government. In International Symposium on Learning Management and Technology Development in the Information and Internet Age. The covergent paths of public and private organizations. University of Bologna. Retrieved from http://riviste.paviauniversitypress.it/index.php/ea/article/view/1227

Kotamraju, N. P., &van der Geest, T. M. (2012). The tension between user-centered design and e-government services. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31,26 1-273.

Kozakova, P. (2011). Can "e-voting" increase turnout and restore faith in politics? Retrieved from http://www.eotwonline.net/2011/09/01/can-e-voting-increase- turnout-and-restore-faith-in-politics/

Kramer, G. H. (1970).The effect of precinct-level canvassing on voter behavior. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34, 560 - 72.

Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30,607-6 10.

Krueger, R. A. (1 994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kweit, M. G., & Kweit, R. W. (1984). The politics of policy analysis: The role of citizen participation in analytic decision-making. Review of Policy Research, 3,234-245.

Ledyard, J. (1981). The Paradox of voting and candidate competition: A general equilibrium analysis. In Essays in Contemporary Fields of Economics. George Hoonvich and James P. Quick, Eds. Lafayette Purdue University Press, pp. 54-80.

Ledyard, J. (1984). The pure theory of two candidate elections. Public Choice, 44(1), 7- 41.

Lee, K., Yan, A., & Joshi, K. (201 1). Understanding the dynamics of users' belief in software application adoption. International Journal of Information Management, 31, 160-170.

Lee, L., Petter, S., Fayard, D., & Robinson, S. (201 1). On the use of partial least squares path modeling in accounting research. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 12(4), 305-328.

Lee, Y. H., Hsieh, Y. C., & Hsu, C. N. (201 1). Adding Innovation Diffusion Theory to the Technology Acceptance Model: Supporting employees' intentions to use e-learning systems. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 14, 124-137.

Legrisa, P., Inghamb, J., & Collerettec, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 40,19 1-204.

Leighley, J. (1995). Political participation: A field review essay. Political Research Quarterly, 48, 18 1-209.

LeVan, C., & Ukata, P. (2012). Countries at the crossroads 2012: Nigeria. Retrieved £tom https://www.£teedomhouse.org/sites/defaul~fles~igeria%20-%2OF~~.pdf

Lewis-Beck, M. S., & Rice, T. W. (1992). Forecasting elections. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Likert, R. (1 932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22(140), 55.

Lin, H. F. (2007). Predicting consumer intentions to shop online: An empirical test of competing theories. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 6(4), 433- 442.

Ling, K. C., Chai, L. T., & Piew, T. H. (2010). The effects of shopping orientations, online trust and prior online purchase experience toward customers' online purchase intention. International Business Research, 3(3), 63-76.

Locke, E. A., Mento, A. J., & Katcher, B. L. (1978). The interaction of ability and motivation in performance: An exploration of the meaning of moderators. Personnel Psychology, 31,269-280.

Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2006). Methods in educational research: From theory to practice. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

Lohmoller , J . B . ( 1989 ) Latent Variable Path Modeling with Partial Least Squares. Heidelberg, Germany: Physica.

MacKenzie, D., & Wajcman, J. (1999). The social shaping of technology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Mahrnod, R., Dahlan, N., Ramayah, T., Karia, N., & Asaari, M. H. A. H. (2005). Attitudinal belief on adoption of E-MBA program in Malaysia. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 6(2), 1 - 10.

Mahmud, S. S. (2015). The 2015 general elections: voter turnout, voting behavior and democratic consolidation in Nigeria. Retrieved fi-om http://www.inecnigeria.org/wp-content/uploads/20 15/07/Conference-Paper-by- Sakah-Saidu-Mahmud.pdf

Maiye, A., & McGrath, K. (2008). Examining institutional interventions: The case of electronic voters' registration in Nigeria. In A. 0. Bada & P. Musa (Eds.), Towards an ICT Research Agenda for African Development, (pp. 72-93). Birmingham, USA: University of Alabama. Retrieved fi-om http://researchspace.csir.co .za/dspace/bitstream/10204/250 l/l/Phahlamohlaka-20 08.pdi%page=72

Majekodunrni, A. (2013). e-Democracy as a panacea for enhanced civic participation in Nigeria. International Journal of Advanced Research in IT and Engineering, 2(6), 16-26.

Mantymaki, M. (2008). Does e-government trust in e-commerce when investigating trust? A Review oftrust literature in e-commerce and egovernment domains. In Towards sustainable society on ubiquitous networks (pp. 253 -264). US : Springer.

Margolis, H. (1982). SelJshness, altruism and rationality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Martins, C. B., Steil, A. V., & Todesco, J. L. (2004). Factors influencing the adoption of the internet as a teaching tool at foreign language schools. Computers &Education, 42(4), 353-374.

Mashood, E. (2012, September 9). The guardian imperative of electronic voting in 2015 elections, Sunday Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.ngrguardiannews.com~index.php?option=com_content&view=a~icle &id=98 177:imperatives-of-electronic-voting-in-2 15-elections- &cat id= 1 04: sunday-magazine&Itemid=567

Matei, A. I . , & Iancu, D. C . (2009, July). e-Administration as a way of increasing the managerial capacity in public sector. (MPRA Paper No. 18954). Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.comlsol3/papers.ch?abstract~id= 1440539

Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research, 2, 173- 191.

Matsusaka, J. G. (1 995). Explaining voter turnout patterns: An information theory. Public Choice, 84, 9 1 - 1 17.

Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734.

McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 334-359.

Meuter, M. L., Bitner, M. J., Ostrom, A. L., & Brown, S. W. (2005). Choosing among alternative service delivery modes: An investigation of customer trial of self- service technologies. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 61-83.

Mitchell, V. (1996). Assessing the reliability and validity of questionnaires: An empirical example. Journal of Applied Management Studies, 5(2), 199-207.

Moga, L. M. (2010). The adoption of e-banking: An application of theories and models for technologies acceptance (PNII-IDEI 1852/2008). Development, Energy, Environment, Economics. Retrieved fiom http://www.wseas.us/e- library/conferences/20 1 O/Tenerife/DEEE/DEEE-4 1 .pdf

Momoh, A. M., & Majaro-Majesty, H. 0 . (2008). ICT, government bureaucracy, and peace building in Nigeria. Retrieved fiom www.researchgate.net/pro fde/Henry_Majaro - Majesty/publication/23 780395 3~ICT~Government~Bureaucracy~and~Peace~buil ding_in_Nigeriallinks/OOb49535607ee8a19 1000000.pdf

Montjoy, R. S. (2008). The Public Administration of Elections. Public Administration Review, 68(5), 788-799.

Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222.

Moymhan, D. P. (2003). Normative and instrumental perspectives on public participation citizen summits in Washington, DC. The American Review of Public Administration, 33(2), 164-1 88.

Moymhan, D. P., & Lavertu, S. (2012). Cognitive biases in governing: Technology preferences in election administration. Public Administration Review, 72(1), 68- 77.

Muhlberger, P. (2004). Access, skill and motivation in online political discussions: Testing cyberrealism. In P. M. Shane (Ed.), Democracy online: The prospects ofpolitical renewal through the Internet. New York: Routledge.

National Association for Peaceful Elections in Nigeria (NAPEN). (20 1 1). Nigeria electoral violence report (NEVR) project (Subaward Number: P. 0. No. S - 10 - 129). Retrieved fiom National Association for Peaceful Elections in Nigeria website http://www.nevr.org/page/index/ 1

National Bureau of Statistics. (2010). The national literacy survey. Nigeria: Author.

National Population Commission. (2009). Nigerian demography and health survey 2008. Abuja, Nigeria: Author.

Navarra, D. D. (201 1). Towards a theory to research and study global information and communication technology programmes. International Journal of Academic Research, 3(1), 823-834.

Neshkova, M. I., & Guo, H. (201 1). Public participation and organizational performance: Evidence fiom state agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(2), 267-288.

Neuman, W. L. (2007). Basics of social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches (2 ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Newman, I., & Benz, C. R. (1998). Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: Exploring the interactive continuum. Southern Illinois: University Press.

Niemi, R. G. (1976). Cost ofvoting and non-voting. Public Choice, 27, 115 -19.

Norris, P. E-Voting as the magic ballot? The impact of Internet voting on turnout in European Parliamentary elections, Paper for the Workshop on 'E-voting and the European Parliamentary Elections ' Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, Villa La Fonte, EUI 10-1 lth May 2002. http://ksghome.harvard.edd-pnorris/ACROBAT/Magic%20Ballot.pdf

Norris, P. (2004). e-Voting as the magic ballot for European Parliamentary Elections? Evaluating e-voting in the light of experiments in UK local elections. The European Union and e-voting: Addressing the Eziropean Parliament's internet voting challenge (PP 60 - 90). London: Routledge.

Norton, (2009). Elections and voting. Retrieved fiom https://www.ssc.wisc.edd-wright/ContemporaericanSociety/Chapter02O 17 %20--%2OVoting%20--%20Norton%20August.pdf

Nunally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Oates, J. (2008). U.K. confirms e-voting death. The Register. Retrieved from http://www.theregister.co.uW2008/10/27/evote counted out/

Obidinnu, J. N., Ekechukwu, B., & Ejiofor, V. E. (2013). Building blocks for the development of electronics employees performance management system. West African Journal ofIndustria1 and Academic Research, 8(1), 25-34.

Odedra-Straub, M. (1993). Critical factors affecting success of CBIS: Cases fiom Afiica. Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), 1 (3), 16-32.

Odumeru, J. A. (2012). Diffusion of online recruiting technology in Nigeria. Online Journal of Social Sciences Research, 1 (4), 104- 1 14.

Okaka, W. (2014). The issues and prospects for e-governance in Eastern Afiica. In Sodhi, Inderjeet Singh. Emerging issues andprospects in African e-government (pp 130 - 140). Hershey PA, USA: Information Science Reference.

Oladesu, E. (2012, March, 4). Is electronic voting feasible in 2015? The Nation. retrieved fiom http://www.thenationonlineng.net/2O1 l/index.php/politics/38750-is- electronic-voting-feasible-in-20 15.html

Olaniyi, 0. M., Adewurni, D. O., Oluwatosin, E. A., Arulogun, 0. T., & Bashorun, M. A. (2011). Framework for multilingual mobile e-voting service infrastructure for democratic governance. African Journal of Computing & ICT, (Journal of IEEE Nigeria Computer Section), 4(3), 23 - 32.

Omolawal, S. A. (201 5). Perceived infrastructural factors afffecting adoption of e- recruitment among human resource management (HRM) practitioners in South- west Nigeria. African Journal for the Psychological Studies of Sociallssues, 18(1), 22-36.

Onimisi, T. (20 15). The prognoses of the 201 1 electoral violence in Nigeria and the lessons for the future. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(1), 242 - 245.

Onyekwelu, B. A. (2010). Enhancing people's awareness in the electoral process inNigeria using information technology. In C. Uwadia, S. Aderounmu, Y. Folajirni & V. Ejiofor (Eds.), Realising a Stable Democratic Political System in Nigeria: IT Tools and Strategies (RESDEMIT 2010) (Vol. 21, pp. 15 - 20). Delta State, Nigeria.

Oostveen, A. M., & Van den Besselaar, P. (2004). Internet voting technologies and civic participation: The users' perspective. Javnost/The Public, XI, 6 1-78.

Oreku, G. S. & Mtenzi, F. J. (2012). A review of e-government initiatives in Tanzania: Challenges and opportunities. In Joseph, K., Bwalya & Zulu, S. (Eds), Handbook of research on e-government in emerging economies: Adoption, e-participation, and legalframeworks vol 1,37 - 70.

Orji, N., & Uzodi, N. (2012). Post election violence in Nigeria: Experience with the 2011 elections. Nigeria: Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC).

Ouellette, J. A., & Wood, W. (1998). Habit and intention in everyday life: The multiple processes by which past behavior predicts future behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 124(1), 54-74.

Oye, N. D., A.Iahad, N., & Ab.Rahim, N. (2012). Computer self-efficacy, anxiety and attitudes towards use of technology among university academicians. A case study of University of Port Harcourt-Nigeria. IJCST, 3(1), 2 1 3-2 19.

Palfiey, T. R., & Rosenthal, H. (1985). Voter participation and strategic uncertainty. American Political Science Review 79(1), 62-78.

Park, Y., & Chen, J. V. (2007). Acceptance and adoption of the innovative use of smartphone. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(9), 1349- 1365.

Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. Int. J. Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 101 - 134.

Peter, J. P. (1979). Reliability: A review of psychometric basics and recent marketing practices. Journal of Marketing Research, XVI, 6 - 17.

Phillips, D. M., & Von Spakovsky, H. A. (2001). Gauging the risks of internet elections. Communications of the ACM, 44(1), 73-ff

Pieters, W., & I(muy, J. (2005). Internet voting not impossible. Communications of the ACM, 48(2), 12.

Plouffe, C. R., Hulland, J. S., & Vandenbosch, M. (200 1). Research report: richness versus parsimony in modeling technology adoption decisions-understanding merchant adoption of a smart card-based payment system. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 208-222.

Porter, C. E., & Donthu, N. (2006). Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine internet usage: The role of perceived access barriers and demographics. Journal of Business Research, 59(9), 999- 1007.

Pousttchi, K., & Wiedemann, D. G. (2007). What influences consumers' intention to use mobile payments. Mobile Communications Working Group, University of Augsburg. Retrieved from http://www.marshall.usc.edu/assets/025/7534.pdf

Powell, A., Williams, C. K., Bock, D. B., Doellman, T., &Allen, J. (2012). e-Voting intent: A comparison of young and elderly voters. Government Information Quarterly, 29(3), 361-372.

Premkumar, G., & Roberts, M. (1999). Adoption of new information technologies in nual small businesses. Omega, 27(4), 467-484.

Premkumar, G., Ramamurthy, K., & Nilakanta, S. (1 994). Implementation of electronic data interchange: An innovation diffusion perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 11 (2), 157- 186.

Punnoose, C. A. (2012). Determinants of intention to use eLearning based on the technology acceptance model. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11(1), 301 - 337.

Qutaishat, F. T. (2012). Users' perceptions towards website quality and its effect on intention to use e-government services in Jordan. International Business Research, 6(1), 97-105.

Ramayah, T., Lee, J. W. C., & In, J. B. C. (201 1). Network collaboration and performance in the tourism sector. Service Business, 5(4), 41 1-428.

Rapoport, R., Abramovitz, A., & McGlennon, J. (1983). The life of theparties. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.

Rasmussen, E. (1 989). Games and information. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Redmond, B. F. (2012, February 14). Overview of social cognitive and self-eficacy theories. Retrieved fi-om https://wikispaces.psu.edu/display/PSYCH484/7.+Self- Efficacy+and+SociaI+Cognitive+Theories

Reginald, N. E. (201 5). Mobile, secure e-voting architecture for the Nigerian electoral system. Journal of Computer Engineering (ZOSR-JCE) 17(2), 27-36.

RERC. (2012). Report of the Registration and Election Review Committee (RERC). Nigeria: Author.

Rezaei-Moghaddam, K., & Salehi, S. (2010). Agricultural specialists' intention toward precision agriculture technologies: Integrating innovation characteristics to technology acceptance model. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(1 l), 1191-1 199.

Rezaei-Moghaddam, K., Salehi, S., & Ajili, A. (2012). Extension of grid soil sampling technology: Application of extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Journal of Research in Agriculture, 2(1), 078-087.

Riebeek, H. (2002). Brazil holds all-electronic national election. Spectrum, IEEE, 39(1 I), 25-26.

Riker, W., & Ordeshook, P. (1968). A theory of the calculus of voting. American Political Science Review, 62,25 - 42

Riker, W., & Ordeshook, P. (1 973). An introduction topositivepolitical theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Straub, D.W. (2012). A critical look at the use of PLS-SEM in MIS quarterly. MZS Quarterly, 36(1), iii-xiv.

Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2014). Smartpls 3. Hamburg: SmartPLS. Retrieved fiom http://www.smartpls.com

Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, A. (2005). SmartPLS 2. University of Hamburg, Hamburg. Retrieved fi-om http://www.smartpls.com

Robbins, M. D., Simonsen, B., & Feldman, B. (2008). Citizens and resource allocation: Improving decision making with interactive web-based citizen participation. Public Administration Review, 68(3), 564-575.

Rogers, E. M. (1983). Dzusion of Innovations (3rd ed.). New York: The Free Press.

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Dzflusion of innovation theory (4Ih ed.). New York: The Free Press.

Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2005). Diffision of innovations. In D. Stacks & M. Salwen (Eds.). An integrated approach to communication theory and research. New York: Routledge.

Salam, B. (2012, June 22). The e-voting panacea to electoral fi-aud in Nigeria. Nigerian Tribune. Retrieved from http:lltribune.comng/index.phplcommentaryl43OOl-the- e-voting-panacea-to-electoral- fi-aud-in-nigeria

Salehi, S., Hayati, D., Karbalaee, F., & Chin W.W. (2012). Factors affecting intention to use variable rate technology-tillage by structural equation modeling. International Journal ofAgriScience, 2(9), 860-874.

Salimonu, R. I., Wan Rozaini, B. S. O., Abdul Jaleel, K. S., & Jimoh, R. G. (2013). Adoption of e-voting system in Nigeria: A conceptual fi-amework. International Journal of Applied Information Systems (IJAIS), 5(5), 8 - 14.

Sang, S., & Lee, J. D. (2009, February). A conceptual model of e-government acceptance in public sector. In Digital Society, 2009. ICDS109. Third International Conference on (pp. 71-76). IEEE.

Sang, S., Lee, J. D., & Lee, J. (2009). e-Government adoption in ASEAN: The case of Cambodia. Internet Research, 19(5), 5 17-534.

Sang, S., Lee, J. D., & Lee, J. (2010). e-Government adoption in Cambodia: A partial least squares approach. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 4(2), 138-157.

Sanusi, A., & Martadha, A. M. (2012). Good governance as a yardstick to measure the effectiveness of e-recruitment in Nigerian public service. Journal of US-China Public Administration, 9(1), 1-7.

Sanusi, A., & Mohamed, A. M. (2012). Relationship between e-recruitment adoption and good governance practices in Nigerian public sector: An empirical study. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 2(4), 57 - 70.

Sarstedt, M., & Wilczynski, P. (2009). More for less? A comparison of single- item and multi-item measures. Die Betriebswirtschaft, 69(2), 21 1-227.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students (5th ed.). London: Pearson Professional Limited.

Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7(2), 147-1 77.

Schaupp, L. C., & Carter, L. (2005). e-Voting: fi-om apathy to adoption. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 18(5), 586-60 1.

Schepers, J. & Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information &Management, 44(1), 90-103.

Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (1 993). Participatory design: Principles and practices. Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Scott, J. E., & Walczak, S. (2009). Cognitive engagement with a multimedia ERP training tool: Assessing computer self-efficacy and technology acceptance. Information & Management, 46(4), 22 1-232.

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2009). Research methods for business: A skill building approach (5th ed.). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.

Sen, A. K. (1 970). Collective choice and social welfare. San Francisco, CA: Holden-Day.

Seyd, P., & Whiteley, P. F. (1992). Labour's grassroot: Thepolitics ofparty membership. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Shaikh, A. A., & Karjaluoto, H. (2015). Mobile banking adoption: A literature review. Telematics and Informatics, 32(1), 129-142.

Shareef, M. A., Kumar, V., Kumar, U., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (201 1). e-Government adoption model (GAM): Differing service maturity levels. Government Information Quarterly, 28(1), 17-35.

Shook, C. L., Ketchen, D. J., Hult, G. T. M., & Kacmar, K. M. (2004). An assessment of the use of structural equation modeling in strategic management research. Strategic Management Journal, 25(4), 397-404.

Silberman, J., & Durden, G. (1975). The rational behavior theory of voter participation: The evidence fi-om congressional elections. Public Choice, 23, 10 1 - 108.

Simon, Herbert (1978). Rationality as a process and as a product of thought. The American Economic Review, 68, 1- 16.

Simon, Herbert (1982). Model of bounded rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Sirianni, C. (2009). Investing in democracy: Engaging citizens in collaborative governance. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

Smith, A. D., & Clark, J. S. (2005). Revolutionising the voting process through online strategies. Online Information Review, 29(5), 5 13-530.

Srite, M. (2006). Culture as an explanation of technology acceptance differences: an empirical investigation of Chinese and US users. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 14(1), 5-26.

Stivers, C. (1990). The public agency as polis active citizenship in the administrative state. Administration &Society, 22(1), 86-105.

Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 36(2), 1 1 1-147.

Su, D., & Huang, X. (2010). Research on online shopping intention of undergraduate consumer in China based on the Theory of Planned Behavior. International Business Research, 4(1), 86-92.

Surry, D. W., & Farquhar, J. D. (1997). Diffusion theory and instructional technology. Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 2(1), 24-36.

Svensson, J., & Leenes, R. (2003). e-Voting in Europe: Divergent democratic practice. Information Polity, 8(1), 3 - 15.

Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics. (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Taherdoost, H., & Masrom, M. (2009, June). An examination of smart card technology acceptance using adoption model. In Information Technology Inteflaces, 2009. ITIf09. Proceedings of the ITI 2009 31st International Conference (pp. 329-334). IEEE.

Tan, F. B., & Sutherland, P. (2004). Online consumer trust: A multi-dimensional model. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), 2(3), 40-58.

Temme, D., Kreis, H., & Hildebrandt, L. (2010). A comparison of current PLS path modeling software: Features, ease-of-use, and performance. In V. Esposito Vinzi, W. Chin, J. Hensler, and H. Wold (Eds.,) Handbook ofpartial least squares, (pp. 741-760). Heidelberg: Springer.

Teo, T. S., Srivastava, S. C., & Jiang, L. (2008). Trust and electronic government success: an empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(3), 99- 132.

Thomas, J. C. (1995). Public participation in public decisions: New skills and strategies forpublic managers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Tobbin, P., & Kuwomu, J. K. (201 1). Adoption of mobile money transfer technology: Structural equation modeling approach. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(7), 59-77.

Tolbert, C. J., & McNeal, R. S. (2003). Unraveling the effects of the internet on political participation? Political Research Quarterly, 56(2), 175-1 85.

Toregas, C. (2001). The politics of e-gov: The upcoming struggle for redefining civic engagement. National Civic Review, 90(3), 235-240.

Tornatzky, L. G., & Klein, K. J. (1982). Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-implementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 29(1), 28-45.

Tsai, S. C., Chen, Y. H., Hsu, C. H., KO, Y. S., & Huang, K. C. (2009, June). Exploring factors affecting the adoption intention toward the integration of traditional Chinese and Western medicine as a disruptive innovation in the health-care service industry.

In Service Systems and Service Management, 2009. ICSSSM'09. 6'" International Conference on (pp. 398-403). IEEE.

Uhlaner, C. (1989). Rational turnout. The neglected role of groups. American Journal of Political Science, 33, 390 - 422.

UN-DPEPA. (2002). Benchmarking e-government: A global perspective, assessing the progress of the UN member states. Available at nettela~ica.org/docs/NetTel%20Safari@the%20EquatorO/o2O(Uganda~202003)/B enchmarkingegovt.pdf

Urbinati, N., & Warren, M. E. (2008). The concept of representation in contemporary democratic theory. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci., 11, 387-4 12.

Uzoka, F.-M. E., & Ndzinge, T. (2009). Empirical analysis of biometric technology adoption and acceptance in Botswana. Journal of Systems and Sofmare, 82(9), 1550-1 564. doi: 10.10 16/j.jss.2009.04.041.

Van de Donk, W. B., Snellen, I. T. M., & Tops, P. W. (1995). Van De Donk, W. B. H. J., & P. W. Tops. (1995). Orwell or Athens? Informatization and the Future of Democracy: A Review of the Literature. In W. B. H. J. Van De Donk, I. T. M. Snellen, and P. W. Tops, (eds). Orwell in Athens: A perspective on informatization and democracy. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Van den Besselaar, P., Oostveen, A.-M., De Cindio, F., & Ferrazzi, D. (2003). Experiments with e-voting technology: Experiences and lessons. In P. Cunningham (Ed.), Building the knowledge economy: Issues, applications and case studies (pp. 7 19- 726 ). Amsterdam: 10s-Press.

Van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers & Education, 50(3), 83 8-852.

Van Slyke, C., Belanger, F., & Comunale, C. L. (2004). Factors influencing the adoption of web-based shopping: The impact of trust. ACMSIGMIS Database, 35(2), 32-49.

Vanderstoep, S. W., & Johnston, D. D. (2009). Research methods for everyday life: Blending qualitative and quantitative approaches (1' ed.). San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.

Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., & Bala, H. (2013). Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 3 7(1), 2 1-54.

Venkatesh, V., Monis, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27,425-478.

Vinzi, E. (2013). (Editorial) Partial least squares structural equation modeling: Rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance. Long Range Planning, 46, 1-12.

Walsham, G., Robey, D., & Sahay, S. (2007). Foreword: Special issue on information systems in developing countries. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 31(2), 3 17-326.

Wan Ismail, W. K., Hong Kit, P. C., Buhari, N., & Muzaini, A. (2012). Acceptance of smartphone in enhancing patient-caregivers relationship. Journal of Technology Management &Innovation, 7(3), 71-79.

Wang, J. S., & Pho, T. S. (2009). Drivers of customer intention to use online banking: An empirical study in Vietnam. African Journal ofBusiness Management, 3(1 I), 669- 677.

Weber, R. P. (Ed.) (1 990). Basic content analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Whiteley, P. F. (1995). Rational choice and political participation. Evaluating the debate. Political Research Quarterly, 48(1), 21 1-233.

Williams, R., & Edge, D. (1996). The social shaping oftechnology. Research Policy, 25(6), 865-899.

Wold , H . ( 1982 ). Soft modeling: The basic design and some extensions . In: K.G. J o reskog and Wold, H. (eds.). Systems under indirect observations: Part I (pp. 1 - 54). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Wolf, P. (2010). Countries with e-votingprojects. Retrieved fiom ace Electoral Knowledge Network website at http://aceproject.org/ace-edfocus/e-voting/comtries

Wolfmger, R., & Rosenstone, S. J. (1 980). Who vote? New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Wu, I., & Wu, K. (2005). A hybrid technology acceptance approach for exploring e-CRM adoption in organizations. Behaviour & Information Technology, 24(4), 303-316.

Wungwanitchakorn, A. (2002). Adoption intention of banks' customers on internet banking service. ABAC Journal, 22(3), 63-80.

Yakubu, Y. A. (20 12). Democracy and political apathy in Nigeria (1 999-20 1 1). European Scientific Journal, 8(20), 3 8-48.

Yang, C. H., Tu, S. Y., & Yen, P. H. (2009, August). Implementation of an electronic voting system with contactless IC cards for small-scale voting. In Information Assurance and Security, 2009. L4S109. Fifth International Conference on on Information Assurance and Security (Vol. 2, pp. 122- 125). IEEE.

Yang, H., Lay, Y. L., & Tsai, C. H. (2006). An implementation and usability evaluation of automatic cash-payment system for hospital. Journal of ScientiJic & Industrial Research, 65,485-494.

Yao, Y., & Murphy, L. (2007). Remote electronic voting systems: an exploration of voters' perceptions and intention to use. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(2), 106- 120.

Zafiropoulos, K., Karavasilis, I., & Vrana, V. (2012). Assessing the adoption of e- government services by teachers in Greece. Future Internet, 4(2), 528-544.

Zarrad, H., & Debabi, M. (2012). Online purchasing intention: Factors and effects. International Business and Management, 4(1), 37-47.

Zhang, X., & Zhang, Q. (2005, August). Online trust forming mechanism: approaches and an integrated model. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Electronic Commerce (pp. 20 1-209). ACM.

Zhang, Y., & Wildemuth, B. M. (2009). Qualitative analysis of content. Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library Science, 308-3 19.

Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 197 - 206.

Zikmund, W. G., Babin, B. J., Carr, J. C., & Griffin, M. (2009). Business research methods (8 ed.). USA: South-Western College Publishing.

Zikmund, W., Babin, B., Carr, J., & Griffin, M. (2012). Business research methods. USA: South-Western Cengage Learning.

Appendix A: Adapted Items

Table A1

Adapted Items

Construct/Items

Participation Intention (ITP)

ITPI. I plan to participate in the future election using e-voting system. ITP2. I intend to participate in the future election using e-voting system. ITP3. I expect to participate in the future election using e-voting system. Perceived Trialability (TRB)

TRl. Before deciding on whether or not to use the e-voting, I would need to use it on a trial basis. TR2. Before deciding on whether or not to use the e-voting, I would need to properly try it out. TR3. I would be permitted to use the e- voting on a trial basis long enough to see what it can do. TR4. Before deciding whether to use any types of e-voting, I would be able to properly try them out. TR05. I would have a great deal of opportunity to try various e-voting technologies. Perceived Observability (OBS)

OBS 1. I believe I would have no difficulty telling others about the results of using e-voting. OBS2. I believe I could communicate to others the outcome of using e-voting. OBS03. I believe I would have no difficulty explaining why using e-voting system may or may not be beneficial. OBS4. I believe the instructions of how to use e-voting is available and visible in many places.

Composite Reliability

-82

.SO

Cronbach a

.88

.85

Sources

Lin (2006)

Park and Chen (2007); Moore and Benbasat (1991)

Al-Busaidi (2012); Meuter, Bitner, Ostrom, and Brown (2005)

Sources

Shareef, Kumar, Kumar and Dwivedi (20 1 1)

Moore and Benbasat (1 99 1)

Powell et al. (20 12)

OBS5. The results of using the e-voting would be apparent to me. Construct/Items

Perceived Ability to Use (PATU)

PATUI. I believe to interact with e- voting system is easy for me. PATU2. I believe the e-voting is flexible to interact with. PATU3. I believe it is easy to operate e- voting. PATU4. I believe interactions with the e- voting system are clear and understandable. PATU5. I can easily do my tasks while using the website. PATU6. I believe it is easy to cast vote using e-voting system. Perceived Relative Advantage (RA)

RAI. I have a belief that using e-voting enables me to vote more quickly. RA2. I believe that using e-voting improves the quality the election. RA3. I believe using e-voting makes it easier to cast my vote. RA4. I predict using e-voting can enhance accuracy of my voting. RA5. I believe Using e-voting can offer me greater control over my vote. Trust in the Technology (TIT)

TITI. I have a perception that the technology has enough safeguards to make me feel comfortable using it to vote. TIT2. I feel assured that legal and technological structures will adequately protect me fi-om problems using e- voting. TIT3. I trust that vote cast using e- voting will be accurately counted. TIT4. I have a perception that e-voting will be safe enough for voting.

Cronbach a

.90

Composite Reliability

.96

TITS. I should trust the security of e- voting system. TIT6. I trust that vote cast using e-voting will not be tampered with. Trust in Electoral Government Officials (TEO) TEOI. I feel that electoral officials act in citizen's best interest. TE02. I feel fine interacting with the electoral officials since they generally fulfills their duties efficiently. TE03. I always feel confident that I can rely on electoral officials to do their part when I interact with them. TE04. I am comfortable relying on the electoral officials to meet their obligations. Trust in Elected Government Officials (TPO) TPOI. I think I can trust elected government officials. TP02. Elected government officials can be trusted not to interfere in the conduct of election. TP03. I am confident that the elected government officials relate good with the electoral officials in accordance with election guidelines. TP04. In my opinion, elected government is trustworthy. Computer Self-efficacy (CSE)

CSE1. I would firid it easy using e-voting without having computer skills. CSE2. It is not easy for me to understand benefits of e-voting without having the required skills to use it. CSE3. I have the computer skills which enable me to use e-voting system. CSE4. Having the computer skills will improve my understanding of e-voting system. CSES. Having the computer skills will enable me to assess the e-voting system.

.75

.9 1 (Teo, Srivastava & Jiang 2008 as adapted fiom McKnight, Choudhury & Kacmar, 2002)*

Alomari et al. (20 12); Powell, Williams, Bock, Doellman and Allen (2012)

Alomari et al. (20 12)

Appendix B: Questionnaire

University Utara Malaysia (UUM) College of Law, Government and International Studies

(COLGIS) Ghazali Shafie Graduate School of Government

(GSGSG) 06010 UUM Sintok, Kedah Darul Aman

Dear Respondent,

For more than a decade, elections in Nigeria is characterized with irregularities of different shapes

and magnitudes including multiple voting, under aged voting, miscomputation of results,

intimidation of voters, etc. Use of traditional paper voting system is hypothesized to be among other

major cause of election problems in Nigeria. The government is therefore planning to introduce

electronic voting (e-voting) system in order to enhance free, fair and credible public elections.

However, deployment of modern voting technology to replace traditional voting system could be

meaninghl only if citizens such as your humble self are willing to accept the technology. This

study is therefore aim to examine the factors affecting voters' intention to participate in public

elections using e-voting technology. Attached herewith a self-explanatory survey questionnaire

designed to sample your opinion about the proposed government project. Your sincere participation

would help to build genuine citizens' opinion that will serve as a guide to policy makers in making

strategic decisions concerning the desired voting system. I am therefore soliciting for your

cooperation to kindly provide objective answers to all the questions in this survey. The survey is

part of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) study being undertaken by the researcher who is a student at

Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM). Meanwhile, be assured that all the information you provide will

be handled with utmost confidentiality and use only for the purpose of this research study. You are

therefore advised not to write either your names or names of your organization on the questionnaire,

please.

Thank you very much for your anticipated cooperation.

Yours sincerely Sabo Ahmad Mobile: +234 803 939 5404 (Nigerian)

+60 147 445 183 (Malaysian) e-mail: ahrnadsabou@vahoo.cm

s945 16@,student.uum.edu.mv

Note: The survey is broadly divided into Section A and Section B. Section A is subdivided into 5 parts. In each of part I - V, you are required to tick (4) an appropriate column provided with options fi-om Strongly Disagree- 1, Disagree-2, Neutral-3, Agree-4 to Strongly Agree-5. Section B contains demographic information.

SECTION A: Part I: Perception on Intention to Participate Using e-Voting System Please tick (J ) between Strongly Disagree- 1 to Strongly Agree-5 that matches your view or level of agreement most for each question.

l=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5-Strongly Agree

Part 11: Perception on e-Voting Characteristics

The following statements describe your perception towards e-voting characteristics. Please tick (4) between Strongly Disagree-1 to Strongly Agree-5 that matches your view or level of agreement most for each question.

A1 A2 A3

1 2

I plan to participate in the fbture election using e-voting machine. I intend to participate in the future election using e-voting machine. I expect to participate in the future election using e-voting machine.

3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5 B1

B2

B3

B4

B5

I have a perception that using e-voting enables me to vote more quickly. I have a perception that using e-voting can improve the quality of the election. I have a perception that using e-voting will be easier for me to cast my vote. I predict using e-voting can enhance accuracy of my voting.

I have a perception that using e-voting can offer me greater control over my vote.

l=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

Part III: Perception on Trust in e-Voting System The following statements describe your trusting perception on e-voting system. Please tick (4) between Strongly Disagree-1 to Strongly Agree-5 that matches your view or level of agreement most for each question.

1 2 3 4 5 C1

C2

C3

C4

C5

Before deciding on whether or not to use the e-voting, I will need to use it on a trial basis. Before deciding on whether or not to use the e-voting, I will need to properly try it out. I should be permitted to use the e-voting on a trial basis long enough to see what it can do. Before deciding whether to use any types of e-voting, I will be able to properly try them out. I would have a great deal of opportunity to try various e-voting technologies.

1 2 3 4 5 Dl

D2

D3

D4

D5

I have a perception that I will have no difficulty telling others about the results of using e-voting. I have a perception that I could communicate to others the outcome of using e-voting. I have a perception that I will have no difficulty explaining why using e-voting system may or may not be beneficial. I have a perception that the instructions on how to use e-voting will be available and visible in many places. I have a perception that the results of using the e-voting will be

1 2 3 4 5 El

E2

E3

E4 E5

E6

I have a perception that the technology has enough safeguards to make me feel comfortable using it to vote. I feel assured that legal and technological structures will adequately protect me fiom problems using e-voting. I trust that vote cast using e-voting will be accurately counted.

I have a perception that e-voting will be safe enough for voting. I should trust the security of e-voting system.

I trust that vote cast using e-voting will not be tampered with.

l=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree S=Strongly Agree

Part IV: Perception on Trust in Government Officials The following statements describe your perception of trust in electoral officials. Please

tick (4) between Strongly Disagree-1 to Strongly Agree-5 that matches your view or level of agreement most for each question.

The following statements describe your perception of trust in elected government officials.

Please tick (4) between Strongly Disagree-1 to Strongly Agree-5 that matches your view or level of agreement most for each question.

1 2 3 4 5 F1

F2

F3

F4

Part V: Perception on Computer Self-efficacy The following statements describe your perception to computer self-efficacy. Please tick (4) between Strongly Disagree-1 to Strongly Agree-5 that matches your view or level of agreement most for each question.

I feel that electoral officials act in citizen's best interest.

I feel fine interacting with the electoral officials since they generally fulfills their duties efficiently. I always feel confident that I can rely on electoral officials to do their part when I interact with them. I am comfortable relying on the electoral officials to perform their obligations.

1 2 3 4 5 G1

G2

G3

G4

I think I can trust elected government officials.

Elected government officials can be trusted not to interfere in the conduct of election. I am confident that the elected government officials relate good with the electoral officials in accordance with election guidelines. In my opinion, elected government officials are trustworthy.

1 2 3 4 5 H1 H2

H3 H4

H5

I would find it easy using e-voting if I have computer skills. It will be easy for me to understand benefits of e-voting if I have computer skills. If I have computer skills, it will enable me to use e-voting system. Having the computer skills will improve my understanding of e- voting system. Having the computer skills will enable me to assess the e-voting system.

l=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

Part VI: Perception on Ability to Use e-Voting System The following statements describe your perception regarding ability to use e-voting system. Please tick (4) between Strongly Disagree-1 to Strongly Agree-5 that matches your view or level of agreement most for each question.

SECTION B Demographic Information: Please Tick (4) Only One option as applicable

1. Gender i Femal iiOMale

1 2 3 4 5 J1

J2

53

J4

J5

2. Educational Background iO Secondary/Primary Certificate iiO NDIOND iiiO Bachelor Degree/HND

I have a perception that interaction with e-voting system will be easy for me. I have perception that e-voting will be flexible to interact with.

I have a perception that it will be easy to operate e-voting.

I have a perception that interactions with the e-voting system will be clear and understandable. I have a perception that I can easily cast my vote using e-voting.

3. Age i018- 25 yrs iiU26- 35 yrs iii036- 45 yrs iv046- 55 yrs vOabove 55 yrs vi

LJOthers (specify) - - - - - - - - - - -

5. Average Monthly Income i Less than N18,000 ii. ON1 8,000 to N50,000 iii. UN5 1,000 to N100,OOO ivON101,OOO to N200,OOO v. 13 above N200,OOO vi q Others (Specify amount)

l=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

6. Computer Proficiency/skills

i 01 can handle basic operation of computer such as MicrosoR office ii n I have advanced skills of computer operations including internet surfing iii I am a computer professional iv I3 I don't have computer skills v nothers (explain) - - - - - - - - - - -

7. How many times did you participate in National Election? 1 Time n2 Times 3 Times 4 Times Others (Specify) - -

l=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree S=Strongly Agree

Appendix C: Interview Protocol

BRIEF IIWORMATION ON THE RESEARCH

Dear (Sirmadam)

Traditional paper-based voting system is characterized with many irregularities leading to

general public dissatisfaction and outcry. e-Voting system is a technological innovation in

form of ATM like, Kiosk, Punch card, or through wireless network such as internet, and

fyred telephones that can be utilized by the government to overturn problems of paper-

based voting system. It could be deploy to enhance fiee, fair and credible public election

and therefore has the potential to increase political participation. However, to introduce e-

voting as an alternative replacement to the traditional method of voting requires research

study that would help strategic planning.

In order to achieve the desired goals, the researcher is conducting stakeholder interviews

for about 30 minutes such as your humble self, who are in a position to provide valuable

information on the proposed e-voting projects for current and future plans. In this regards,

we would like to invite you to be part of this study, which will assist the researcher to

identify potential challenges and solutions to participation in election using e-voting

system. It's expected that information gained fi-om this research study will provides the

decision makers with better understanding of the challenges for better planning and

implementation.

I assure you that all information and identities will remain confidential and treat only for

the purpose of this research. Could I ask you please to complete the attached Consent Form

prior to our interview?

Thank you in anticipation of your participation.

Yours sincerely,

Sabo, Ahmad

CONSENT FORM FOR INTERVIEWEE PARTICIPANTS

INFORMATION TO PARTICIPANTS:

We would like to invite you to be a part of Doctor of Philosophy study into 'e-Voting

System Adoption and its Impact on Voter Turnout in Nigeria'.

This survey is part of Doctor of Philosophy study, being undertaken by the researcher, Sabo

Ahmad and supervised by Ass. Prof (Dr.) Siti Alida John Bt Abdullah and Dr. Rozita Bt

Arshad at Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM). The objective of this study is to explore

factors with potential to imposing decrease participation in elections using e-voting system.

This study will assist the decision makers to better understand the complexities involved

in e-voting adoption in order to ensure current and future plans are in the right direction

and according to the citizen's needs. Semi-structured interviews is part ofthe primary data

collection tools that will be used in this study. The interview will be taped and notes taken

with full consent of the participants for accuracy of information. The information gathered

will be treated with utmost confidentiality along with the identity of the participants. The

anonymity and confidentiality of participants and information collected from them will be

ensured through important steps outlined below.

CERTIFICATION BY PARTICIPANT

1, ---------------------------------of-----------

.................................... certify that I am above

18 years old and that I am voluntarily giving my consent to participate in the study 'E-

Voting System Adoption and its Impact on Voter Turnout in Nigeria'.

I certify that the objectives of the study, together with any risks and safeguards associated

with the procedures listed hereunder to be carried out in the research, have been fully

explained to me by Sabo Ahmad, and that I freely consent to participate agrreing with the

procedures mentioned below:

> I am participating voluntarily.

352

3 The interview will be audio taped and notes taken.

3 The interview will take place in

3 The information gathered fi-om me will be kept confidential along with my identity.

3 The anonymity and confidentiality of information collected from me as participant

will be ensured.

I certify that I have had the opportunity to have any questions answered and that I

understand that I can withdraw fi-om this study at any time and that this withdrawal will

not jeopardize me in any way.

Signed:

Date:

NOTE: If you have any queries or complaints about the way you have been treated, you may contact the Secretary, Ghazali SIzafie Graduate School of Government, College of law, Government and International Studies, Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM), PMB 06010 Sintok, Kedah Darul Aman, Malaysia, Tel: (+604) 9286601/6613, or email: yusll17@um.edu.my

SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR QUALITATIVE DATA COLLECTION

Note: The main questions are listed below. However, this is a semi-structured interview

and it is anticipated that more questions may be asked based on the interviewee responses.

Demographic Information

Gender: MaleFernale Age - - - - - - - Marital Status - - - -

Education level - - - - 0 Computer literacy - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Occupation- - - - ---- - -- -- --- c position - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - State -------- - Residence -----------------

General Questions

1. How would you describe problems of Nigerian elections in relation to inappropriate

method of voting?

2. How would you describe plan by the government to introduce e-voting system in near

future elections?

3. How would you describe the proposed introduction of e-voting system in relation to

encouraging participation in elections?

4. How would you describe potential challenges to acceptance of e-voting system by the

citizens?

5. What in your opinion are possible solutions to the potential problems of the proposed

e-voting?

Appendix D: Demographic Profile of Interviewees

Table F1

Detailed Demographic Profile ofthe Intewiewees

Category Designation Gender Age Education Income Res Computer Bracket Level level literacy

Voter 1 - Male 31 - 45 Higher High Urban Basic Qualification Income Computer

Skills Voter2 - Male 18 - 30 Lower Average Rural No

Qualification Income Computer Skills

Voter 3 - Female 31 - 45 Higher High Urban Basic Qualification Income Computer

Skills Voter4 - Male 46 and Higher High Urban Advanced

above Qualification Income Computer Skills

Voter 5 - Male 31 - 45 Zero Low Rural No Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Voter6 - Female 31 - 45 Lower Low Urban No Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Voter 7 - Male 18 - 30 Higher Average Rural Advanced Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Voter8 - Male 31 - 45 Zero Low Urban Basic Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Voter9 - Male 18 - 30 Higher Average Urban Basic Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Voter 10 - Male 18 - 30 Lower Low Rural Basic Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Category Designation Gender Age Education Income Res Computer Bracket Level level literacy

Voter11 - Female 46 and Zero High Urban No above Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Voter 12 - Male 31 - 45 Higher Average Rural Advanced Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Voter13 - Female 31 - 45 Lower Average Urban Basic Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Voter 14 - Male 18 - 30 Higher High Urban Advanced Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Voter15 - Male 31-45 Zero Average Rural Basic Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Electoral Residence Male 31 - 45 Higher Average Urban Basic official 1 Electoral Qualification Income Computer

Commissioner Skills

Electoral Head of Legal Male 46 and Higer Low Rural No official 2 Department above Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Electoral Head of Male 18 - 30 Higher Average Urban Basic official 3 Logistic and Qualification Income Computer

Transport Skills

Electoral Head of Female 31-45 Higer Average Rural Advanced official 4 Computer Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Electoral Head of Male 46 and Higher High Urban Basic official 5 Operation above Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Electoral Head of Male 31 - 45 Higer Low Urban Advanced official 6 Human Qualification Income Computer

Resource Mgt Skills

Category Designation Gender Age Education Income Res Computer Bracket Level level literacy

Party Organizing Male 18 - 30 Lower Average Rural Advanced official 1 Secretary Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Party Vice Male 31 - 45 Higher High Urban Basic official 2 Chairman Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Party Women Female 46 and Lower Low Rural No official 3 Ixader above Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Party Youth Leader Male 3 1 - 45 Lower High Urban Basic official 4

- Qualification Income Computer

Skills

Table F2 Intewiewees' Response about Challenging Factors with Potential for Imposing Decrease in Voter Turnout using e- Voting System

TEO = Trust in Electoral Government Officials; TPO = Trust in Elected Government Oficials; BPO = Bureaucratic policy orientation; ConsC = Constitutional control; TechC = Technical capacity; Illit = Illiteracy; CompL = Computer literacy; DigD = Digital divides; BelS = Belief systems; InInf = Inadequate information; Trial = Trialing the technology; ReqF = Requisite

facilities; ElecS = Electricity supply

Table F3

Intewiewees' Response about Remedy to Potential Challenges of Voter Turnout in a Drive to Adopt e- Voting Systsem

P. Official3 P. Official4

EPF = Effective Policy Framework; SAL = Severe Anti-corruption Law; MI = Absolute Independent of INEC; EID = Effective Information Dissemination; ATA = Appealing Technological Attributes; IIMP = Incremental Implementation; ARF = Adequate Requisite Facilities

1 1

1 1

1 1 1

1 1

1 1